Am 11.11.2014 um 13:03 schrieb Artem Bityutskiy: > On Tue, 2014-11-11 at 09:15 +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: >>> Do we really want the function name in every log message? >>> IMHO this is not wise except for pure debug logs. >> >> BTW: Why UBI-X? This looks odd. Either use UBIX or ubiX. > > How about something like this (untested): > > > From: Artem Bityutskiy <[email protected]> > Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 13:56:34 +0200 > Subject: [PATCH] UBI: clean-up printing helpers > > Let's prefix UBI messages with 'ubiX' instead of 'UBI-X' - this is more > consistent with the way we name UBI devices. > > Also, commit "32608703 UBI: Extend UBI layer debug/messaging capabilities" > added the function name print to 'ubi_msg()' - lets revert this change, since > these messages are supposed to be just informative messages, and not debugging > messages.
What is the benefit of having the function name still in ubi_warn() and ubi_err()? e.g. [ 95.511825] ubi0 error: ubi_attach_mtd_dev: mtd0 is already attached to ubi0 If the log message is so cryptic that you need to lookup it in the source to understand it, we better fix the message. > Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy <[email protected]> > --- > drivers/mtd/ubi/ubi.h | 8 ++++---- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/ubi/ubi.h b/drivers/mtd/ubi/ubi.h > index f80ffab..7a92283 100644 > --- a/drivers/mtd/ubi/ubi.h > +++ b/drivers/mtd/ubi/ubi.h > @@ -50,13 +50,13 @@ > #define UBI_NAME_STR "ubi" > > /* Normal UBI messages */ > -#define ubi_msg(ubi, fmt, ...) pr_notice("UBI-%d: %s:" fmt "\n", \ > - ubi->ubi_num, __func__, ##__VA_ARGS__) > +#define ubi_msg(ubi, fmt, ...) pr_notice("ubi%d: " fmt "\n", \ > + ubi->ubi_num, ##__VA_ARGS__) We could even use UBI_NAME_STR here. :-) Thanks, //richard -- 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/
