Re: [PATCH V2] include/linux/kernel.h: Move logging bits toinclude/linux/logging.h
From: Joe Perches
Date: Tue Nov 09 2010 - 16:08:46 EST
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 16:00 -0500, Ted Ts'o wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 11:17:56AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> > Differences in logging.h to original kernel.h
> > were done for cleanliness and checkpatch.
> Yet another reason why I detest mindless use of checkpatch.
If it makes you happier, I didn't use it here nor do I
generally use checkpatch, (just ask Andrew Morton), I just
wrote that more as a shorthand for kernel style conformance.
> I **really** dislike patches that try to do any kind of
> cleanup (checkpatch.pl or otherwise) at the same time as they move
> code around.
So fine, I'll do a minimal code movement only patch
followed by a style cleansing patch.
Anyone else have an opinion on using logging.h vs printk.h
as an include name?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/