Re: [PATCH] fs/efs/inode.c: use func instead of function name

From: Al Viro
Date: Mon Sep 19 2022 - 20:24:59 EST

Next message: Daniel Latypov: "Re: [PATCH i-g-t v2 3/4] lib/igt_kmod: add compatibility for KUnit"
Previous message: kernel test robot: "[jsarha:probes-ipc4 5/5] sound/soc/sof/sof-client-probes-ipc4.c:173: warning: expecting prototype for ipc3_probes_deinit(). Prototype was for ipc4_probes_deinit() instead"
In reply to: Jiangshan Yi: "[PATCH] fs/efs/inode.c: use __func__ instead of function name"
Next in thread: Gao Xiang: "Re: [PATCH] fs/efs/inode.c: use __func__ instead of function name"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 10:33:14AM +0800, Jiangshan Yi wrote:
> From: Jiangshan Yi <yijiangshan@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> It is better to use __func__ instead of function name.

Why is it better? And why is it *not* sent to (active)
maintainers of fs/erofs? I'm not going to apply that behind their
backs and I would ask akpm to abstain from taking that one.

Next message: Daniel Latypov: "Re: [PATCH i-g-t v2 3/4] lib/igt_kmod: add compatibility for KUnit"
Previous message: kernel test robot: "[jsarha:probes-ipc4 5/5] sound/soc/sof/sof-client-probes-ipc4.c:173: warning: expecting prototype for ipc3_probes_deinit(). Prototype was for ipc4_probes_deinit() instead"
In reply to: Jiangshan Yi: "[PATCH] fs/efs/inode.c: use __func__ instead of function name"
Next in thread: Gao Xiang: "Re: [PATCH] fs/efs/inode.c: use __func__ instead of function name"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Re: [PATCH] fs/efs/inode.c: use __func__ instead of function name

Re: [PATCH] fs/efs/inode.c: use func instead of function name