On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 05:06:57PM +0200, holzheu wrote: > Current prototype implementation: > ================================= > > The structure of a kernel message is: <component>.<msg number>: <msg> > > * component: Name of the kernel or driver component e.g. "pci", "ide", > etc. > * msg number: Within the component unique number of a kernel message. > * msg: printk message > > New macros KMSG_ERR(), KMSG_WARN(), etc. are defined, which have to be > used in printk. These macros have as parameter the message number and > are using a per c-file defined macro KMSG_COMPONENT. > > Example: Define message 2 in component "kmsgtest": > > #define KMSG_COMPONENT "kmsgtest" > > void f(void) > { > printk(KMSG_ERR(1) "device %x not online\n", devno); > }
Ick, why are you ignoring what we have already with dev_printk() and friends? We are just finally getting developers to use that, I think it will be almost impossible to get people to change to something else, especially one that isn't even as "correct" as what dev_printk() offers you today, will be quite hard. So, why not use what we already have and work off of it? thanks, greg k-h - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/