Re: [PATCH v4 10/13] staging: lustre: lnet: lnet: checkpatch.pl fixes

[Joe Perches]

On Sat, 2015-05-23 at 00:25 +0000, Drokin, Oleg wrote:
> On May 22, 2015, at 8:18 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> >>>> I wonder what is more clear about that in your opinion ve
> >>>> lustre_error/lustre_debug?
> >>> 
> >>> The fact that you have to explain this shows that it's
> >>> at least misleading unless you completely understand the
> >>> code.
> >> 
> >> Or you know, you might take the function name at the face value
> >> and assume that CERROR means it's an error and CDEBUG means it's a debug message?
> > 
> > Maybe, but I think that it'd be better if the mechanism
> > it uses was more plainly named something like lustre_log.
> 
> While the idea seems good, the biggest obstacle here is such that
> there's already a thing called lustre log (llog for short too) -
> it's kind of a distributed journal of operations.
> 
> Its there a different synonym, I wonder?

Maybe: lustre_printk, lustre_logmsg, lustre_output



--
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/