lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Mar]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/1] Add documentation for proper usage and order of preference of calls to print diagnostic messages.
From
Hi,

[+CC Rob]

2014-03-04 15:31 GMT+01:00 yogesh <mr.yogesh@gmail.com>:
> This patch adds documentation that clarifies the use of various
> diagnostic printing messages. It shows the preference of subsystem_dbg
> calls to dev_dbg (whenever possible), as they first preferred format of
> logging debug messages.
> Signed-off-by: Yogesh Chaudhari <mr.yogesh@gmail.com>

Acked-by: Levente Kurusa <levex@linux.com>

> ---
> Documentation/CodingStyle | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/CodingStyle b/Documentation/CodingStyle
> index 7fe0546..083f738 100644
> --- a/Documentation/CodingStyle
> +++ b/Documentation/CodingStyle
> @@ -662,6 +662,23 @@ and driver, and are tagged with the right level: dev_err(), dev_warn(),
> dev_info(), and so forth. For messages that aren't associated with a
> particular device, <linux/printk.h> defines pr_debug() and pr_info().
>
> +If the subsystem has its own diagnostic macros then they should be used
> +instead of dev_dbg calls.
> +e.g. If you are using network subsystem, use netdev_dbg;
> +if you are using V4L, use v4l_dbg etc.
> +This standardises the output format in every subsystem.
> +
> +Depending on your changes, the following order of precedence
> +applies to printing messages:
> +1. [subsystem]_dbg() is preferred when the subsystem has its own
> +diagnostic macros.
> +2. dev_dbg() is preferred when you have a generic struct device object.
> +3. pr_debug() should be used when 1 and 2 above are not applicable.
> +4. printk() should be avoided.
> +
> +Note: The above order applies to diagnostic calls of all log levels viz:
> +*_emerg, *_alert, *_crit, *_err, *_warn, *_notice, *_info and *_dbg.
> +
> Coming up with good debugging messages can be quite a challenge; and once
> you have them, they can be a huge help for remote troubleshooting. Such
> messages should be compiled out when the DEBUG symbol is not defined (that
> --
>
> Regards
> Yogesh
> [...]

A lot better, but please next time send it as a separate mail
with subject [PATCH v2] or something like that. Thanks!

--
Regards,
Levente Kurusa


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-03-04 16:21    [W:0.954 / U:2.092 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site