Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] apparent typo in ixgb.h, "_DEBUG_DRIVER_" looks wrong | From | Arjan van de Ven <> | Date | Tue, 10 Oct 2006 12:01:46 +0200 |
| |
On Tue, 2006-10-10 at 05:28 -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > 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?
to use pr_debug or dev_dbg. Yes it'll mean a slight change for this driver, but just do it.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |