On 10/22/22 05:40, Deepak R Varma wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 23, 2022 at 08:35:47PM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 22, 2022 at 01:03:42AM +0530, Deepak R Varma wrote:
>>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/p80211netdev.c b/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/p80211netdev.c
>>> index e04fc666d218..6bef419e8ad0 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/p80211netdev.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/p80211netdev.c
>>> @@ -881,55 +881,42 @@ static int p80211_rx_typedrop(struct wlandevice *wlandev, u16 fc)
>>> wlandev->rx.mgmt++;
>>> switch (fstype) {
>>> case WLAN_FSTYPE_ASSOCREQ:
>>> - /* printk("assocreq"); */
>>> wlandev->rx.assocreq++;
>>> break;
>>> wlandev->rx.ctl_unknown++;
>>> break;
>>> }
>>> - /* printk("\n"); */
>>> drop = 2;
>>> break;
>>>
>>> @@ -1007,7 +986,6 @@ static int p80211_rx_typedrop(struct wlandevice *wlandev, u16 fc)
>>> wlandev->rx.cfack_cfpoll++;
>>> break;
>>> default:
>>> - /* printk("unknown"); */
>>> wlandev->rx.data_unknown++;
>>> break;
>>> }
>>
>> Shouldn't these printks be guarded under CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL instead?
>
> Hi Sanjaya,
> Sure they can, but I think they are very basic tracing message and do not appear
> to carry much of information useful the event of debugging. Do you have a
> suggestion on what additional information may be added to make them more useful?
>
> If you still think we should have then in the CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL guard, let me
> know and I will attempt to improve these.
>
> Thank you,
> ./drv
>
Greg said we should just deleting these printks [1].
[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/Y1VL%2FwITM64U6qLi@xxxxxxxxx/
Thanks anyway.
--
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
