From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] include/linux/kernel.h: Move logging bits to include/linux/logging.h
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 13:08:40 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1289336920.28590.44.camel@Joe-Laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101109210030.GI3099@thunk.org>
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?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-09 21:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-09 5:38 [PATCH] include/linux/kernel.h: Move logging bits to include/linux/logging.h Joe Perches
2010-11-09 18:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-11-09 18:43 ` [PATCH V2] " Joe Perches
2010-11-09 18:49 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-11-09 19:17 ` Joe Perches
2010-11-09 21:00 ` Ted Ts'o
2010-11-09 21:08 ` Joe Perches [this message]
2010-11-09 23:52 ` [PATCH V3] include/linux/kernel.h: Move logging bits to include/linux/printk.h Joe Perches
2010-11-09 20:01 ` [PATCH V2] include/linux/kernel.h: Move logging bits to include/linux/logging.h Alexey Dobriyan
2010-11-09 20:10 ` Joe Perches
2010-11-09 20:30 ` Joe Perches
2010-11-15 18:04 ` [PATCH V4] include/linux/kernel.h: Move logging bits to include/linux/printk.h Joe Perches
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1289336920.28590.44.camel@Joe-Laptop \
--to=joe@perches.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).