Re: [tip:sched/urgent] sched: Restore printk sanity

[Valdis . Kletnieks]

On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 19:45:14 +0100, Ingo Molnar said:

>  - in the last stable kernel, v2.6.32, still more new printk()s were 
>    introduced than pr_*() lines:
> 
>      $ git log -p v2.6.31..v2.6.32 | grep '^+.*\<pr_' | wc -l
>      2016
>      $ git log -p v2.6.31..v2.6.32 | grep '^+.*\<printk' | wc -l
>      3531

Ahem. That's not introduced, that's 'added or modified'.

% git log -p v2.6.31..v2.6.32 | grep -C 5 '^+.*\<pr_' | head
-        * In case of failure continue with no timer. */
+       /* Test if the external timer can be actually used.
+        * In case of failure continue without timer. */
        if (unlikely((stmmac_open_ext_timer(dev, priv->tm)) < 0)) {
-               pr_warning("stmmaceth: cannot attach the HW timer\n");
+               pr_warning("stmmaceth: cannot attach the external timer.\n");
                tmrate = 0;
                priv->tm->freq = 0;
                priv->tm->timer_start = stmmac_no_timer_started;
                priv->tm->timer_stop = stmmac_no_timer_stopped;

Meanwhile, the fact that there's only about a 2-to-1 difference in patches when
there's a 6-to-1 difference in existing code tells me that proportionally,
there is *more* activity with pr_foo variants than printk.

printk:  3531 hits in 61126 uses = 5.7% churn
pr_foo: 2016 hits in 10861 uses = 18.5% churn

The numbers need much deeper analysis to make any sort of real statistical
conclusion here...

> 
> An estimated completion of the 'conversion' to pr_*() to be in infinite numbe
r 
> of years.
> 
> > [...] just removing the "sched:" would be better for consistency.
> > 
> > Or alternatively... deprecate pr_*?
> 
> Or alternatively, my favorite: let people who write the code use whichever 
> variant they prefer.
> 
> 	Ingo

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature