Hi Christian. On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 03:28:15PM +0000, Koenig, Christian wrote: > Am 29.07.19 um 16:35 schrieb Sam Ravnborg: > >>>> Even then it so useless (which drm driver is this message for???) that I > >>>> want to remove them all :( > >>> Yeah, agree. I mean it is nice if the core drm functions use a prefix > >>> for debug output. > >>> > >>> But I actually don't see the point for individual drivers. > >> We should all migrate to the versions with device... > > Just to do an xkdc.com/927 I have considered: > > > > drm_err(const struct drm_device *drm, ...) > > drm_info(const struct drm_device *drm, ...) > > > > drm_kms_err(const struct drm_device *drm, ...) > > drm_kms_info(const struct drm_device *drm, ...)) > > Why not get completely rid of those and just use dev_err, dev_warn, > pr_err, pr_warn etc? > > I mean is it useful to have this extra printing subsystem in DRM while > the standard Linux one actually does a better job? The added functionality of drm_xxx_err would be to keep the current drm.debug=0x1f filtering on the command-line. I do not think we can do this with the standard logging. And then we can prefix every logging with driver name and device name. The idea is to make a thin layer on top of the existing pr_xxx() functions. So not a full subsystem, only a wrapper on top of what we already have. Anyway, idle talk only. We need patches and sample output if we should discuss more. Sam _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
