lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Oct]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Dynamic Debug module.ddebug fake param enhancements V4
    On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 08:22:11AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
    > On Tuesday, September 28, 2010 06:25:18 am Thomas Renninger wrote:
    > > Greg: Do you mind pushing the first (1/4, V4) and the last (4/4)
    > > patch into your tree for linux-next and leave the two PNP patches
    > > out, please.

    I've applied them now.

    > > More PNP related discussion, below.
    > >
    > > On Monday 27 September 2010 17:09:18 Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
    > > > On Monday, September 27, 2010 02:25:46 am Thomas Renninger wrote:
    > > >
    > > > > What do you think (dev_dbg vs printk(KERN_DEBUG...)?
    > > ...
    > > > With the exception of the ones in pnp/resource.c that I want to convert
    > > > to dev_printk(KERN_DEBUG), I think all the pnp_dbg() uses are things
    > > > I used during PNP development and haven't ever needed since.
    > >
    > > Ok. Sounds sane.
    > > I used the PNP parts as it nicely showed what the
    > > module.ddebug boot param is doing, but I agree it hasn't much
    > > advantage for PNP.
    > >
    > > Whatabout compiling pnp in one module namespace, the first
    > > of the two PNP patches?
    >
    > [2/4] looks reasonable to me.

    And this one.

    >
    > > E.g. attached patch would be an on top patch which provides no
    > > functional change, just that a pnp.debug would be a module param:
    > > cat /sys/module/pnp/parameters/debug
    >
    > As does the one below.

    And this one.

    So that left 3/4 out of the series applied to my tree.

    If this is incorrect, please let me know.

    thanks,

    greg k-h


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-10-06 23:05    [W:0.038 / U:0.224 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site