On Sat, 2015-05-23 at 00:07 +0000, Drokin, Oleg wrote: > 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 shows 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? No, because each is labeled with the KERN_<level> that it uses. [] > >> 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? Maybe, but I think that it'd be better if the mechanism it uses was more plainly named something like lustre_log. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
