linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] plist: replace pr_debug with printk in plist

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: <20140507103512.5b3f7928@gandalf.local.home>
Date:	Wed, 7 May 2014 10:35:12 -0400
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Dan Streetman <ddstreet@...e.org>
Cc:	Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@....com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] plist: replace pr_debug with printk in plist_test()

On Wed, 7 May 2014 10:21:28 -0400
Dan Streetman <ddstreet@...e.org> wrote:

> It would be even better if the note could clarify that sometimes it is
> ok to use printk(KERN_DEBUG

Exactly. I think it's rather stupid to have to do a #define DEBUG to
have pr_debug() print in general.

I see no reason to have pr_debug() be anything different than the other
pr_*() functions. Perhaps the pr_debug() should have been called
debug_print(), or dyn_print(), where it can be dynamic printk or
enabled with a DEBUG macro.

The plist code is a perfect scenario where printk(KERN_DEBUG...) is
appropriate, and using pr_debug() with a hard coded #define DEBUG is
just stupid.

-- Steve
--
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/