[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CABRD5hLWn_hxC-ZzDJycw4=hDVuOiUiwxaz5Ljuxbgk1KAkpGw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 09:26:45 -0200
From: Jorgyano vieira <jorgyano@...il.com>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Cc: gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, devel@...uxdriverproject.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Staging: crystalhd: crystalhd_misc: improved debug macros
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 4:40 AM, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 12:20:06AM -0200, Jorgyano Vieira wrote:
>> Improvement of debug macros to ensure safe use on if/else statements.
>>
>
> How are the originals unsafe?
for example If you have something like:
if(foo)
BCMLOG(...);
else
do that
> Really we want to get rid of these. It would be easy to delete
> BCMLOG_ENTER and BCMLOG_LEAVE right now. They're only used for five
> functions. BCMLOG() is slightly complicated. BCMLOG_ERR() could
> be sed replaced with pr_err().
>
> So could you do that instead? Send a patch to remove BCMLOG_ENTER
> and BCMLOG_LEAVE? Then send another patch to replace BCMLOG_ERR()
> with pr_err(). Take a look at how the pr_fmt macro is used for
> this. Don't actually do it with sed. Take the time and review each
> printk() and notice bugs as you go along. You could replace them
> file by file if you wanted or all at once, which ever is easier for
> you. Then send a third patch to add the do {} while(0) block to
> BCMLOG() until someone works up enough motivation to fix it
> properly?
yes, this patch don't make the entire work,
I intend to make the remaining work on the next patches.
thanks for the suggestions.
regards,
Jorgyano Vieira
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists