From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: Clemens Ladisch <clemens@ladisch.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@redhat.com>,
Jim Cromie <jim.cromie@gmail.com>, Liam Girdwood <lrg@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Remove most all #define pr_fmt(fmt) lines
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 09:22:45 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1332951765.16535.38.camel@joe2Laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120328094609.GA3232@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 10:46 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 12:30:03AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 09:27 +0200, Clemens Ladisch wrote:
> > > Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > +regulator-y := core.o dummy.o fixed-helper.o
> > > > +regulator-objs := $(regulator-y)
> > > > -obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR) += core.o dummy.o fixed-helper.o
> > > > +obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR) += regulator.o
> > > > Any objections or other suggestions/improvements?
> This seems an incredibly obscure approach.
> > > Instead of doing a Makefile change that has no _obvious_ connection with
> > > printk, wouldn't it be better to just define pr_fmt with "regulator: "?
> This seems like a much better idea if we're going to do anything; it
> means that we don't end up embedding module names in things (which are
> after all a bit of an implementation detail) and get to pick the name so
> we can do something like get the prefix which is used for the symbols in
> the code even if things are split over multiple modules.
A negative is that requires #defines in multiple
source files or rearranging #includes to centralize
that #define.
A negative of the Makefile approach is the name is
obscurely chosen. A positive is it's only chosen
once.
> In the case above we don't support modular build in the first place.
Unrelated but is there any particular reason why
the regulator core code couldn't be build as a
module?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-28 16:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-27 17:23 Joe Perches
2012-03-28 7:27 ` Clemens Ladisch
2012-03-28 7:30 ` Joe Perches
2012-03-28 9:46 ` Mark Brown
2012-03-28 16:22 ` Joe Perches [this message]
2012-03-28 16:33 ` Mark Brown
2012-03-28 7:42 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2012-03-28 8:03 ` 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=1332951765.16535.38.camel@joe2Laptop \
--to=joe@perches.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=clemens@ladisch.de \
--cc=jbaron@redhat.com \
--cc=jim.cromie@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lrg@ti.com \
/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
Powered by JetHome