Re: [PATCH] cpufreq {d,}printk adjustments

Hi,

On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 03:38:13PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Convert some dprintk-s to printk-s as their use of KERN_* indicates they
> were meant to be used that way. Alternatively, the KERN_* prefixes could
> be removed and the dprintk-s then retained.

For these ones, removing KERN_* and leaving them as dprintk() seems to be
the better choice. The other two patches look fine to me.

Thanks!

	Dominik
-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH] cpufreq {d,}printk adjustments
    • From: "Jan Beulich" <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH] cpufreq {d,}printk adjustments
    • From: "Jan Beulich" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 001/001] INPUT: new ioctl's to retrieve values of EV_REP and EV_SND event codes
• Next by Date: RE: Issues with sata_nv and 2 disks under 2.6.16 and 2.6.17-rc2
• Previous by thread: [PATCH] cpufreq {d,}printk adjustments
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq {d,}printk adjustments
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]