lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20130801222304.GG31857@quack.suse.cz> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2013 00:23:04 +0200 From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> Cc: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] jbd: use a single printk for jbd_debug() On Thu 01-08-13 12:21:05, Joe Perches wrote: > On Thu, 2013-08-01 at 15:01 -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > > Backport of jbd2 commit 169f1a2a87aae44034da4b9f81be1683d33de6d0 > > ("jbd2: use a single printk for jbd_debug()") > > Hey Paul. > > > diff --git a/include/linux/jbd.h b/include/linux/jbd.h > [] > > @@ -56,16 +56,13 @@ > > #define JBD_EXPENSIVE_CHECKING > > extern ushort journal_enable_debug; > > > > -#define jbd_debug(n, f, a...) \ > > - do { \ > > - if ((n) <= journal_enable_debug) { \ > > - printk (KERN_DEBUG "(%s, %d): %s: ", \ > > - __FILE__, __LINE__, __func__); \ > > - printk (f, ## a); \ > > - } \ > > - } while (0) > > +void __jbd_debug(int level, const char *file, const char *func, > > + unsigned int line, const char *fmt, ... > > + > > +#define jbd_debug(n, fmt, a...) \ > > + __jbd_debug((n), __FILE__, __func__, __LINE__, (fmt), ##a) > > #else > > -#define jbd_debug(f, a...) /**/ > > +#define jbd_debug(n, fmt, a...) /**/ > > #endif > > It might have been (and may still be) simpler/better > to use a single macro like: > > #define jbd_dbg(n, fmt, ...) \ > do { \ > if ((n) < journal_enable_debug) \ > pr_debug(fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__); \ > } while (0) > > and then use dynamic_debug to add the __func__, > and __LINE__ when desired. > > echo -n 'module jbd +pfl' <dynamic_debug>/control Umm, I like the Paul's way better. Sure we have to jump into __jbd_debug() even if we won't write any message because debug level is low but OTOH jbd_debug() is non-empty only when JBD_EXPENSIVE_CHECKING is enabled. So there the extra call is fine. Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> SUSE Labs, CR -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists