From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joe Perches Date: Sat, 23 May 2015 00:36:30 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 10/13] staging: lustre: lnet: lnet: checkpatch.pl fixes Message-Id: <1432341390.29657.29.camel@perches.com> List-Id: References: <1432237849-53947-1-git-send-email-shuey@purdue.edu> <1432237849-53947-11-git-send-email-shuey@purdue.edu> <1432242004.20840.68.camel@perches.com> <15C0AFDB-CA69-40E5-B65E-C559A5B5CE47@intel.com> <1432309337.29657.16.camel@perches.com> <05DE4AF3-20A6-40F6-BAC6-79C140E490AF@intel.com> <1432339030.29657.20.camel@perches.com> <863F0D66-99B1-4658-8A99-E3A843E0E8FC@intel.com> <1432340285.29657.26.camel@perches.com> <467D21EA-E5E8-4F16-AABD-31D79062FFF9@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <467D21EA-E5E8-4F16-AABD-31D79062FFF9@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "Drokin, Oleg" Cc: Julia Lawall , Michael Shuey , "" , "" , "" , "" , "" , "" 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