On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 7:06 PM, Stefan Reinauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> ron minnich schrieb: > > On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 2:58 PM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >>> On 25.10.2008 13:05, Uwe Hermann wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 03:31:20AM +0200, Peter Stuge wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Uwe Hermann wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Drop the 'BIOS_' prefix from all printk() log-levels. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> It would be nice to have another prefix though. Maybe LOG_ ? Without >>>>> a prefix some of the names look a bit too generic. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> I've though about that, but I don't see it as a big problem. Only >>>> "DEBUG" tends to be misused in v2, but we can easily avoid that by >>>> using DEBUG_SMBUS, DEBUG_FOOBAR #defines in v3 (if at all; all of >>>> those custom DEBUG #defines should be printk()-loglevels anyway; >>>> I think the reason for DEBUG in v2 is usually romcc/size relåted(?)) >>>> >>>> If we all desperately want a prefix, how about something really short, >>>> e.g. LDEBUG, LWARN, LINFO, ... ? I'd really like to keep the printk() >>>> lines as short as possible for readability reasons. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> Can't we just keep the names as they are? >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> I think the majority prefer that they not change ... >> >> > Add me to that majority. I think those names are good as they are. > > Please don't change such stuff just for the sake of it. > > a) it really does not matter > b) don't make it longer than it is > c) keep it comprehensible. I'm agreeing here too. changing it breaks most outstanding patches, screws up everyone that's used to BIOS_X, and I can't really see any benefit to a different name, aside from less typing, but that's what copy and paste are for ;) -Corey
-- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
