W dniu 26 sierpnia 2011 11:02 użytkownik Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> napisał: > On Fri, 2011-08-26 at 10:55 +0200, Rafał Miłecki wrote: >> 2011/8/25 Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx>: >> > Convert multiple BRCMF_<debug_level> macros to a single >> > brcmf_dbg(level, fmt, ...) macro. >> I'm not sure if that "_dbg" suffix is a really good choice. You use >> "_dbg" for all the kinds of messages, while "DEBUG" is already one >> kind of messages. > > No, not really. These _are_ debugging uses. > > The #include is called dhd_dbg.h and > the whole block is guarded by > > #if defined(BCMDBG) > >> We have also other types like EMERG, ALERT, CRIT, >> ERR, WARNING, NOTICE, INFO and DEBUG. > > Except for the last, those aren't debugging uses, > these are. It makes sense, maybe some messages should be just always printed. It seems some of they may be important for common-user having problem with his card. Just few random ones: brcmf_dbg(ERROR, "device attach failed\n"); brcmf_dbg(ERROR, "Failed to enable F1 Err: 0x%08x\n", err_ret); brcmf_dbg(ERROR, "MACEVENT: %s [unsupported version --> brcmf version:%d dongle version:%d]\n", brcmf_dbg(ERROR, "mismatched OUI, bailing\n"); brcmf_dbg(ERROR, "brcmf_net_attach failed, err %d\n", brcmf_dbg(ERROR, "failed to bring up cfg80211\n"); brcmf_dbg(ERROR, "HT Avail request error: %d\n", err); -- Rafał _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
