[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACE9dm_msF7e2aKEeT0J6maxnka1NpaAbTWTp5r1MbpDHSw4Kg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 21:30:24 +0300
From: Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc: Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>,
Dmitry Kasatkin <d.kasatkin@...sung.com>,
Hiroshi Doyu <hdoyu@...dia.com>,
"sarah.a.sharp@...ux.intel.com" <sarah.a.sharp@...ux.intel.com>,
"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/2] dev-core: fix build break when DEBUG is enabled
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-08-27 at 13:32 -0400, Jason Baron wrote:
>> On 08/27/2013 12:20 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2013-08-27 at 17:47 +0300, Dmitry Kasatkin wrote:
>> >> When DEBUG is defined, dev_dbg_ratelimited uses dynamic debug data
>> >> structures even when CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG is not defined.
>> >> It leads to build break.
>> >> For example, when I try to use dev_dbg_ratelimited in USB code and
>> >> CONFIG_USB_DEBUG is enabled, but CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG is not, I get:
>> > Jason?
>> >
>> > Seems mostly sensible to me but I think the first check
>> > needs to be
>> >
>> > #if defined(CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG) && defined(DEBUG)
>>
>> Why? All the other call-sites, do it the way Dmitry has done it.
>
I followed the pattern..
> Fine. Originally I thought it useful to not
> store the ratelimit state, but this way those
> messages can be enabled via the dynamic_debug
> control.
>
Indeed.
Thanks.
- Dmitry
--
Thanks,
Dmitry
--
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