Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 31 May 2010 11:58:30 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] mac8390: change an error return code and some cleanup, take 4 | From | Geert Uytterhoeven <> |
| |
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 11:21, <fthain@telegraphics.com.au> wrote: > On Mon, 31 May 2010, David Miller wrote: >> This is getting tiring Finn. > > I agree. My patch addresses all of the criticism of the earlier > submissions. > > To make it plain: there are 25 files or so that use ei_debug. Three of > those that now have the KERN_DEBUG printk's suppresed by the DEBUG macro > only do so as an apparently unintended side effect of a commit that claims > to "implement dynmic debug infrastructure". (Go figure.) > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/davem/net-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=dd0fab5b940c0b65f26ac5b01485bac1f690ace6 > > Your suggestion to use pr_debug is invoking compile time infrastructure > (the DEBUG macro), so it is not in the spirit of this commit, and it is > not relevant to any criticism from you or Joe of the earlier submissions. > > Please apply the patch.
`pr_debug()' indeed now may generate code if DEBUG is not defined, i.e. if CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG is enabled. This is intented for debug infrastructure the user may want to enable later.
If you want the old behavior, you can use `pr_devel()' instead, which only generates code if DEBUG is defined. This is intended for debug infrastructure for developers only.
However, you used `printk(KERN_DEBUG pr_fmt()...)`, which always generates code. I'm still not 100% sure that was intentional?
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
-- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
| |