On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 8:33 AM, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 2009-03-26 at 11:26 -0400, Bob Copeland wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Johannes Berg >> <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Could we use some newfangled thing like tracepoints for this >> >> instead of printk? Disclaimer: I know nothing about such >> >> things. >> > >> > Probably. Want to look at how to do that? :) >> >> Sure, I'll do some research and see what's involved. Don't hold >> up the patch on my account though. > > Oh doesn't matter to me -- I was posting it more because I did it, I > don't have an immediate need to have it included. If you want to take > some time to look into that we can hold the patch without any trouble, I > agree it would probably be nicer, just didn't work with any of that > stuff before so I didn't even think of it. Might be nice to have a debugfs entry and en enable/disable target for each, then you can just enable the trace prints on the ones you need. Just throwing that out there. Luis -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
