Messages in this thread | | | From | "Eads, Gage" <> | Subject | RE: [PATCH 01/20] dlb2: add skeleton for DLB 2.0 driver | Date | Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:18:46 +0000 |
| |
> -----Original Message----- > From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> > Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2020 10:58 AM > To: Eads, Gage <gage.eads@intel.com> > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; arnd@arndb.de; Karlsson, Magnus > <magnus.karlsson@intel.com>; Topel, Bjorn <bjorn.topel@intel.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/20] dlb2: add skeleton for DLB 2.0 driver > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 08:43:12AM -0500, Gage Eads wrote: > > +static int dlb2_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, > > + const struct pci_device_id *pdev_id) { > > + struct dlb2_dev *dlb2_dev; > > + int ret; > > + > > + dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "probe\n"); > > ftrace is your friend. Remove all of your debugging code now, you don't need > it anymore, especially for stuff like this where you didn't even need it in the > first place :(
I'll remove this and other similar dev_dbg() calls. This was an oversight on my part.
I have other instances that a kprobe can't easily replace, such as printing structure contents, that are useful for tracing the usage of the driver. It looks like other misc drivers use dev_dbg() similarly -- do you consider this an acceptable use of a debug print?
Thanks, Gage
> > Same for everywhere else in all of these patches. I'll stop reviewing now, > someone at Intel should have caught basic stuff like this before now, sad... > > greg k-h
| |