[lkml]   [2004]   [Jun]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: drivers/block/ub.c
On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 12:05:22AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Jun 2004, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
> > The current usb-storage works quite well on servers where netdump can
> > be brought to bear, but on desktop its debuggability leaves some room
> > for improvement.
> I agree that the debug logging in usb-storage is not good. A worthwhile
> improvement would be to log only commands that fail or get an error, with
> the logging selected by the normal USB debugging (not usb-storage verbose
> debugging) configuration option. Matt, what do you think?

This is an acknowledged weak point of usb-storage.

A 'log only on error' system might be good... but it's going to be a bit
tricky for two reasons:

1) We have to keep data around longer than currently, so we can log it if
something goes wrong later (so we see how we got to this point).

2) What counts as an error? We probably only want this to kick in when the
SCSI error-recovery does. Normal 'failed commands' probably shouldn't


Matthew Dharm Home:
Maintainer, Linux USB Mass Storage Driver

I want my GPFs!!!
-- Stef
User Friendly, 11/9/1998
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:04    [W:0.265 / U:1.784 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site