Re: Large block device patch, part 1 of 9

[H. Peter Anvin]

Pavel Machek wrote:
>>
>>While we're talking about printk()... is there any reason *not* to
>>rename it printf()?
> 
> I believe printf() is good idea. I put printk() into userland programs
> too many times now, and used printf() too many times from kernel.
 >

The only reason I can think of *not* to call it printf() is that you may 
want to do something for userspace testing like:

#define printk(X, Y...) fprintf(stderr, X, ## Y)

	-hpa