[lkml]   [2008]   [Aug]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/5] ide debugging macros
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 11:08:38PM +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> Hi,
> On Sunday 17 August 2008, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > Hi Bart,
> >
> > here's something i've been wanting to do for a long time: debugging macros. The
> > reason for it is that i got tired of adding debug printk's everytime i'm testing
> > something so here we go.
> >
> > The debugging macro is similar to the old ones but is one for all drivers
> > (currently only ide-floppy), is nice on branch prediction and is controlled by a
> > drive->debug_mask switch which is a module parameter and as such can be set at
> > module load time, of course. I've been thinking of adding also a sysfs attribute
> > too but can't seem to find quite the justification for it so no sysfs for now :)
> if you look closely you should already find it :)
> [ module parameters are exported through sysfs and it uses 0644 mask ]

Those I saw. (You mean /sys/bus/ide/drivers/ide-cdrom/, for example, right?)
But if so, those come from the gen_driver's ide_bus_type and those are device
attributes and I was thinking of adding ide_bus_type.drv_attrs which are driver-
and not device-specific but since i haven't read into the sysfs code too much
yet this is my hunch what we should do.

> > In addition, one can still optimize away all the debug calls in the old manner
> > and i'm sure those will be removed completely too when ide generic conversion is
> > done.
> >
> > Please tell me what you think, what can be changed/improved and after we've
> > figured out the details I'll do the other drivers too.
> Looks pretty good to me (after quick look) and I applied to pata tree.
> PS I wonder whether we may also want to have global debug_mask for core code
> messages ('drive' is not always available) in the longer-term. Or maybe even
> only global debug_mask for both core code and driver messages?

Let me answer you with a question :) : is a u64 bitmask going to be enough for
all the debugging levels, both core and drivers ? The way I see it, hmm, probably ...


 \ /
  Last update: 2008-08-19 08:19    [W:0.069 / U:6.064 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site