Hi,
On Sat, Apr 13, 2024 at 04:35:06PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > Also we're talking about two lines of code, I wouldn't call that bloat ;-)
>
> With this patch, yes. But once you allow debug code, it is hard to draw
> a line which debug is still okay and which is too fine-grained. And then
> you end up with a lot. Over the years, I developed the tendency to try
> to have less but meaningful error printouts. But I don't enforce it
> strictly because it is too much bike-shedding discussion.
>
> In case of this error printout here, it is just wrong. But, see, it also
> came from this tendency I don't like to have printouts for every error.
I agree with Wolfram here. Debug messages are OK if they are
providing real useful information to a final product.
Besides, as I explained earlier, the patter:
dev_dbg("timed out")
return -ETIMEDOUT;
(print a debug but return error) doesn't make much sense.
But, I this is all personal preference. So that I can also leave
it to the specific maintainer.
>From my side all patches in this series are r-b'ed, except for
patch 6 where there are 3 dev_dbg in a row stating the same
thing.
Thanks Dragan and Heiko for your feedback.
Andi
