Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 09 Jul 2014 10:10:28 -0500 | From | Alex Elder <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/4] printk: rename DEFAULT_MESSAGE_LOGLEVEL |
| |
On 07/09/2014 10:00 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 08:04:13AM -0500, Alex Elder wrote: >> This commit: >> a8fe19eb kernel/printk: use symbolic defines for console loglevels >> makes consistent use of symbolic values for printk() log levels. >> >> The naming scheme used is different from the one used for >> DEFAULT_MESSAGE_LOGLEVEL though. Change that symbol name to be >> MESSAGE_LOGLEVEL_DEFAULT for consistency. >> >> Note that we don't rename CONFIG_DEFAULT_MESSAGE_LOGLEVEL (to avoid >> breaking existing config files that might reference it). >> >> Signed-off-by: Alex Elder <elder@linaro.org> >> --- >> include/linux/printk.h | 2 +- >> kernel/printk/printk.c | 2 +- >> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/include/linux/printk.h b/include/linux/printk.h >> index 319ff7e..3d1ccad 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/printk.h >> +++ b/include/linux/printk.h >> @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ static inline const char *printk_skip_level(const char *buffer) >> } >> >> /* printk's without a loglevel use this.. */ >> -#define DEFAULT_MESSAGE_LOGLEVEL CONFIG_DEFAULT_MESSAGE_LOGLEVEL >> +#define MESSAGE_LOGLEVEL_DEFAULT CONFIG_DEFAULT_MESSAGE_LOGLEVEL > > Well, I can't say I like it - we have the config item > CONFIG_DEFAULT_MESSAGE_LOGLEVEL and DEFAULT_MESSAGE_LOGLEVEL resembles > it for a reason - it is the corresponding define coming from .config. > > With this change you have: > > CONFIG_DEFAULT_MESSAGE_LOGLEVEL > MESSAGE_LOGLEVEL_DEFAULT > > which is more confusing. To me at least. I can't see the resemblance at > a quick glance anymore.
Yes I realized this just sort of moved that sort of problem to a different place. The change was responding to the inconsistency in naming in "printk.c". I can control the effects of that, but I can't predict who might be using various config options, so I avoided doing that rename.
Was I being overly cautious on the config option name? I could fix that too and have consistency everywhere.
-Alex
| |