On May 22, 2015, at 7:57 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > On Fri, 2015-05-22 at 21:16 +0000, Drokin, Oleg wrote: >> On May 22, 2015, at 11:42 AM, Joe Perches wrote: >> >>> On Fri, 2015-05-22 at 08:08 +0000, Drokin, Oleg wrote: >>>> On May 22, 2015, at 1:06 AM, Julia Lawall wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Thu, 21 May 2015, Michael Shuey wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> That's a task (of many) I've been putting on the back burner until the code >>>>>> is cleaner. It's also a HUGE change, since there are debug macros >>>>>> everywhere, and they all check a #define'd mask to see if they should fire, >>>>>> and the behavior is likely governed by parts of the lustre user land tools >>>>>> as well. >>>>>> >>>>>> Suggestions are welcome. Do other parts of the linux kernel define complex >>>>>> debugging macros like these, or is this a lustre-ism? Any suggestions on >>>>>> how to handle this more in line with existing drivers? >>>>> >>>>> Once you decide what to do, you can use Coccinelle to make the changes for >>>>> you. So you shouldn't be put off by the number of code sites to change. >>>>> >>>>> The normal functions are pr_err, pr_warn, etc. Perhaps you can follow >>>>> Joe's suggestions if you really need something more complicated. >>>> >>>> Ideally leaving CERROR/CDEBUG in Lustre would be desirable from my perspective. >>> >>> My issue with CERROR is the name is little misleading. >>> It's actually a debugging message. >>> #define CERROR(format, ...) CDEBUG_LIMIT(D_ERROR, format, ## __VA_ARGS__) >> >> Except it's not a debugging message. >> There is a clear distinction. > > Not really. If the first reading sjows that the mechanism it > goes through is called CDEBUG, a reasonable expectation should > be that it's a debugging message. Well, various pr_err/pr_dbg for example, go through printk in the end too. Do that make them the same? > >> CERROR is something that get's printed on the console, because it's believed >> to be serious error (At least that's how the theory for it's usage goes). >> It also gets rate-limited so that the console does not get overflown. >> (but the debug buffer gets the full version). >> (there's also LCONSOLE that always get's printed, but it does not get the >> prefixes like line numbers and stuff). >> >> CDEBUG on the other hand is a debugging message (of which ERROR messages are >> sort of a subset (D_ERROR mask)). You can fine-tune those to be noops or >> to go into console or to debug buffer only. Most of those are doing nothing >> because they are off in the default debug mask, until actually enabled. >> >> That CERROR usees CDEBUG underneath is just to share some common infrastructure. >> >>> I think it'd be clearer as >>> lustre_debug(ERROR, ... >>> even if the name and use style is a little longer. >> >> I wonder what is more clear about that in your opinion ve >> lustre_error/lustre_debug? > > The fact that you have to explain this shows that it's > at least misleading unless you completely understand the > code. Or you know, you might take the function name at the face value and assume that CERROR means it's an error and CDEBUG means it's a debug message? > It'd be more intelligible if this CERROR became lustre_err > and the actual debugging uses were lustre_dbg But the actual underlying call is hidden by the macro anyway and you never get to see it. You see CDEBUG/CERROR and how is that different from lustre_debug/lustre_err? > Perhaps it needs a better explanation somewhere not in the > code but in some external documentation. I haven't looked. > _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
