Re: [PATCH 1/7] printk: clean up return value

[Alan Jenkins <alan-jenkins@tuffmail.co.uk>]

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Hmm. I kind of agree with this, but at the same time I suspect that no 
> caller should ever care about the loglevel characters (since they won't be 
> _shown_), so your change still doesn't make it return a sensible value.
>
> So I get the feeling that you should also add a
>
> 	message_len -= 3;
>
> to the case where we peel off the "<.>" loglevel part at the head of the 
> string. No?
>   

The value is only really sensible for partial printk()s... except that
they're supposed to be prefixed with KERN_CONT.  So yes, good point.

> Or we could just change it to 'void'. As Joe Perches says, nobody really 
> cares deeply enough for this to generally even matter.
>   

That involves more work, which explains why I shied away from it :-). 
Ok, I'll do it.

Alan