On Mon, 2020-07-13 at 00:24 +0530, Suraj Upadhyay wrote: > On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 11:16:33AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: [] > > Perhaps change the __drm_printk macro to not > > dereference the drm argument when NULL. > > > > A trivial but perhaps inefficient way might be > > used like: > > > > drm_<level>(NULL, fmt, ...) [] > > diff --git a/include/drm/drm_print.h b/include/drm/drm_print.h [] > > @@ -395,8 +395,8 @@ void drm_dev_dbg(const struct device *dev, enum drm_debug_category category, > > > > /* Helper for struct drm_device based logging. */ > > #define __drm_printk(drm, level, type, fmt, ...) \ > > - dev_##level##type((drm)->dev, "[drm] " fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__) > > - > > + dev_##level##type((drm) ? (drm)->dev : NULL, "[drm] " fmt, \ > > + ##__VA_ARGS__) > > > > #define drm_info(drm, fmt, ...) \ > > __drm_printk((drm), info,, fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__) > > > > Hi Joe, > Thanks for your input. > But I don't think that this change would be a good idea as we are > supposed to find or make a substitute of WARN_* macros which > take a `condition` as an argument and check for its truth. > And I guess passing a NULL to dev_<level> would cause a format warning. > > Also, the WARN_* macros are doing their job fine, and passing a NULL > value everytime you want to warn about a certain condition at a > particular line, doesn't seem good to me. > > Thus, I think that WARN_* macros should be untouched. So do I but the suggestion was not about WARN macros only about drm_<level> macros and possibly unnecessary conversions to dev_<level> when a drm_device context is unavailable. Also, you don't have to guess, the code is there for you to inspect. dev_<level> when a NULL is used as the first argument emits "(NULL device *)" instead of dev_driver_string(dev) and dev_name(dev). See: drivers/base/core.c::__dev_printk() _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
