On Thu, 2020-06-11 at 17:59 -0400, Jason Baron wrote: > > On 6/11/20 5:19 PM, jim.cromie@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > trimmed.. > > > > > > > Currently I think there not enough "levels" to map something like > > > > > drm.debug to the new dyn dbg feature. I don't think it is intrinsic > > > > > but I couldn't find the bit of the code where the 5-bit level in struct > > > > > _ddebug is converted from a mask to a bit number and vice-versa. > > > > > > > > Here [1] is Joe's initial suggestion. But I decided that bitmask is a > > > > good start for the discussion. > > > > > > > > I guess we can add new member uint "level" in struct _ddebug so that we > > > > can cover more "levels" (types, groups). > > > > > > I don't think it is allocating only 5 bits that is the problem! There were 6 unused bits in struct _ddebug; The original idea was to avoid expanding the already somewhat large struct _ddebug uses and the __verbose/__dyndbg section that can have quite a lot of these structs. I imagine adding another int or long wouldn't be too bad. > > > The problem is that those 5 bits need not be encoded as a bitmask by > > > dyndbg, that can simply be the category code for the message. They only > > > need be converted into a mask when we compare them to the mask provided > > > by the user. > > > I also suggested adding a pointer to whatever is provided by the developer so the address of something like MODULE_PARM_DESC(variable, ...) can be also be used. > > heres what I have in mind. whats described here is working. > > I'll send it out soon > > Cool. thanks for working on this! Truly, thank you both Jim and Stanimir. Please remember that dynamic_debug is not required and pr_debug should still work. > > API: > > > > - change pr_debug(...) --> pr_debug_typed(type_id=0, ...) > > - all existing uses have type_id=0 > > - developer creates exclusive types of log messages with type_id>0 > > 1, 2, 3 are disjoint groups, for example: hi, mid, low You could have a u8 for type if there are to be 3 classes bitmask level group by value though I believe group by value might as well just be bitmask and bool is_bitmask is enough (!is_bitmask would be level) cheers, Joe
