-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hans Reiser wrote: > Jeff, thanks so kindly for cleaning all this up, it must have been very > tedious, so extra thanks for it. > > I will now quibble about some trivia.... > > Hans > > Jeff Mahoney wrote: > >>ReiserFS warnings can be somewhat inconsistent. >>In some cases: >>* a unique identifier may be associated with it >>* the function name may be included >>* the device may be printed separately >> >>This patch aims to make warnings more consistent. reiserfs_warning() prints >>the device name, so printing it a second time is not required. The function >>name for a warning is always helpful in debugging, so it is now automatically >>inserted into the output. Hans has stated that every warning should have >>a unique identifier. Some cases lack them, others really shouldn't have them. >> >> > What cases should not have them?
I don't think that "routine" messages should have identifiers associated with them. I guess in a more exact sense, messages that are directly associated with user input, like mount option parsing, finding the superblock, an unfinished reiserfsck, or enabling CONFIG_REISERFS_CHECK. I guess a quick visual search for NO_ID in the patch would be the best way of expressing this. I could be convinced otherwise, and that's why I made two separate #defines for a missing id or deliberately no id. - -Jeff - -- Jeff Mahoney SuSE Labs -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFC3E2uLPWxlyuTD7IRAufMAJ9RB1jrQalthIExa/4h+IouWrjr7gCcC34j wGWoF4EI5kcfAWaL4UScBWo= =mX/a -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
