On Sat, 2015-05-23 at 00:25 +0000, Drokin, Oleg wrote:
On May 22, 2015, at 8:18 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
>>>> I wonder what is more clear about that in your opinion ve
>>>> lustre_error/lustre_debug?
>>>
>>> The fact that you have to explain this shows that it's
>>> at least misleading unless you completely understand the
>>> code.
>>
>> Or you know, you might take the function name at the face value
>> and assume that CERROR means it's an error and CDEBUG means it's a debug
message?
>
> Maybe, but I think that it'd be better if the mechanism
> it uses was more plainly named something like lustre_log.
While the idea seems good, the biggest obstacle here is such that
there's already a thing called lustre log (llog for short too) -
it's kind of a distributed journal of operations.
Its there a different synonym, I wonder?
Maybe: lustre_printk, lustre_logmsg, lustre_output