From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id p0C7etEM154868 for ; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 01:40:55 -0600 Received: from mail.internode.on.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 6F2F7257567 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2011 23:43:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.internode.on.net (bld-mail20.adl6.internode.on.net [150.101.137.105]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id SWvA7hvCpeoEAVaO for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2011 23:43:07 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 18:43:04 +1100 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/12] xfs: rework error logging infrastructure Message-ID: <20110112074304.GN28803@dastard> References: <1294792553-8378-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1294805789.3115.131.camel@doink> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1294805789.3115.131.camel@doink> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Alex Elder Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 10:16:29PM -0600, Alex Elder wrote: > On Wed, 2011-01-12 at 11:35 +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > This series completely reworks the cmn_err logging infrastructure > > by replacing it with a simple, consistent API that can be used everwhere. > > IOWs, this series replaces the various cmn_err APIs: > > . . . > > I reviewed the whole series, and offered a correction > on just one thing. I might quibble with the indentation > of some of the format strings here or there, but I > didn't bother, there sometimes is no nice way to > do those. Yeah, I tried to make them a bit more consistent - one line if possible, even if the indenting was not "pretty". In some places it made a major improvement, in other places I wasn't quite so happy with the result. > I personally like the result a lot, it's a lot cleaner > and easier on the eyes. > > In any case, you say it's an RFC but I'm OK with it. It was an RFC because I wasn't sure whether people would like the interface I proposed and converted to. I know I mentioned it previously, but no-one commented in reply with a yay or nay, so I just went an did it and this is the result. > I'm just starting to test with it but you can consider > the whole series reviewed by me. Great, thanks. I'll push it out into a topic branch tomorrow... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs