linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Resurrect old pr_debug() semantics as pr

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20090406212417.GC3212@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 6 Apr 2009 17:24:17 -0400
From:	Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>
To:	Michael Ellerman <michael@...erman.id.au>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	gnb@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Resurrect old pr_debug() semantics as pr_devel()

On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 02:30:03PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> pr_debug() used to produce zero code unless DEBUG was #defined. This is
> now no longer the case in practice[1].
> 
> There are places where it's useful to have debugging printks, but we
> don't want them to generate any code in production kernels.
> 
> So add a new macro, pr_devel(), for _devel_opment, to provide the old
> semantics, ie. if the programmer doesn't explicitly enable debugging,
> no code is produced.
> 
> [1]: You can turn CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG off, but it's enabled in at least
>      one distro kernel, so it's not really a solution.
> 

hmm...its designed to have low overhead when CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG
is on, but none of the debugging printks are enabled. Is there a
specific benchmark or test case that is unaccpetable?

thanks,

-Jason
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/