Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] printk: fix zero-valued printk timestamps in early boot

On Wed, Apr 15 2026 at 02:19, Roberto A. Foglietta wrote:
> While keeping architectures separate is for abstraction layer best
> practice, in very specific cases abstraction can be a meaningless
> concept or much less important than having a single file for a single
> feature (the complementary way of organising stuff). Because in Linux
> the abstraction layer approach applies for architectures, the gap
> between aesthetic and a specific case like an early boot macros set
> hack for debugging is to clarify the exception from the general rule
> in the header itself.

Please spare me this AI bullsh*t.

There is absolutely ZERO justification for this at all. End of story.

Thanks,

        tglx