On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 02:27:34AM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > I'm *guessing* that "_DEBUG_DRIVER_" should really be
> > "DEBUG_DRIVER" here, since there is no other occurrence of the
> > former anywhere in the source tree.
>
> Since it's debugging guard, underscored or not... doesn't matter.
> Convert to pr_debug or dev_dbg of you want to deal with it.
>
> > --- a/drivers/net/ixgb/ixgb.h
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ixgb/ixgb.h
> > @@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ #include "ixgb_hw.h"
> > #include "ixgb_ee.h"
> > #include "ixgb_ids.h"
> >
> > -#ifdef _DEBUG_DRIVER_
> > +#ifdef DEBUG_DRIVER
> > #define IXGB_DBG(args...) printk(KERN_DEBUG "ixgb: " args)
> > #else
> > #define IXGB_DBG(args...)
but what you're suggesting is not equivalent. i submitted that patch
to fix what *seems* to be an obvious, innocuous typo, to bring that
one header file into sync with the rest of the source tree, nothing
more.
if all debugging should now use either of pr_debug() or dev_dbg(),
that's fine but i notice that both of those macros will be defined
only if "DEBUG" is defined, not "DEBUG_DRIVER". so making the change
you suggest would *not* be a trivial change.
what's the current standard for debugging directives in the kernel?
rday
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
