On Tuesday 25 July 2006 16:47, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-07-26 at 00:43 +0200, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> > On 26/07/06, Bjorn Helgaas <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > If we don't find any devices, we shouldn't print anything.
> > >
> > I disagree.
> > I find it quite nice to be able to see that the driver loaded even if
> > it finds nothing. At least then when there's a problem, I can quickly
> > see that at least it is not because I didn't forget to load the
> > driver, it's something else. Saves time since I can start looking for
> > reasons why the driver didn't find anything without first spending
> > additional time checking if I failed to cause it to load for some
> > reason.
>
> I'll add a second reason: it is a REALLY nice property to be able to see
> which driver is started last in case of a crash/hang, so that the guilty
> party is more obvious..
initcall_debug is a more reliable way to find that. Do you want
all drivers to print something in their init function? Right now,
there's really no consistency. My guess is that the majority don't
print anything until a device is found. But I admit I didn't try
to count them.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
