linux-kernel - Re: [alsa-devel] Improving or replacing snd

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: <1369983967.10556.48.camel@joe-AO722>
Date:	Fri, 31 May 2013 00:06:07 -0700
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
Cc:	Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
	alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
	Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] Improving or replacing snd_printk()

On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 08:37 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> It's a problem only with snd_printk(), as CONFIG_SND_VERBOSE_PRINTK
> influences on the behavior of snd_printk() and not on the debug prints
> with snd_printd() & co.

Are you're perhaps confused about how CONFIG_SND_VERBOSE_PRINTK
works with or varies between snd_printd and snd_printk?

#if defined(CONFIG_SND_DEBUG) || defined(CONFIG_SND_VERBOSE_PRINTK)
__printf(4, 5)
void __snd_printk(unsigned int level, const char *file, int line,
		  const char *format, ...);

...

#define snd_printk(fmt, args...) \
	__snd_printk(0, __FILE__, __LINE__, fmt, ##args)

#ifdef CONFIG_SND_DEBUG
[...]
#define snd_printd(fmt, args...) \
	__snd_printk(1, __FILE__, __LINE__, fmt, ##args)

I don't see a difference.

> Hence, the goal we should achieve is rather to drop
> CONFIG_SND_VERBOSE_PRINTK.  *This* is the useless thing.

Maybe.

> Meanwhile, many snd_printk() messages might start looking annoying
> with the extra information.  If so, such lines should be replaced with
> the standard prints like dev_*().  I think almost all snd_printk()
> like below are better replaced with standard ones.

below?  Was there something that was supposed to be below?
Are you referring to the KERN_ERR/urb example above?

> So, alternatively, we can begin with replacing some snd_printk() with
> the standard functions, then dropping CONFIG_SND_VERBOSE_PRINTK.

Dropping CONFIG_SND_VERBOSE_PRINTK would simplify code a bit.

> I think most of snd_printd() and snd_printdd() can be kept as is.
> These are just debug messages, after all.

Some of those are emitted at levels other than KERN_DEBUG.
I think that odd.

--
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/