[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160216234539.GA142596@printesoi1.mtv.corp.google.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 15:45:39 -0800
From: Victor Dodon <printesoi@...omium.org>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Matthew Dharm <mdharm-usb@...-eyed-alien.net>,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, usb-storage@...ts.one-eyed-alien.net,
Gwendal Grignou <gwendal@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: storage: make US_DEBUGPX print with LOGLEVEL_DEBUG
On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 05:20:21PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 04:13:43PM -0800, Victor Dodon wrote:
> > The US_DEBUGPX macro uses printk without specifying a kernel log level, so
> > the default kernel log level is used, which may not match LOGLEVEL_DEBUG
> > used in usb_stor_dbg. Use printk_emit with LOGLEVEL_DEBUG instead.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Victor Dodon <printesoi@...omium.org>
> > ---
> > drivers/usb/storage/debug.h | 10 ++++++++--
> > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> Can you just get rid of US_DEBUGPX() entirely please? It shouldn't be
> needed anymore, just use usb_stor_dbg() instead.
Using usb_stor_dbg() instead of US_DEBUGPX() in
usb_stor_show_command() prints one byte per line with the full syslog
header, like this:
7,0,Feb 16 14:30:41,ubuntu,kernel:,[ 422.876236] Command
TEST_UNIT_READY (6 bytes)
7,0,Feb 16 14:30:41,ubuntu,kernel:,[ 422.876242] bytes:
7,0,Feb 16 14:30:41,ubuntu,kernel:,[ 422.876249] 00
7,0,Feb 16 14:30:41,ubuntu,kernel:,[ 422.876255] 00
7,0,Feb 16 14:30:41,ubuntu,kernel:,[ 422.876261] 00
7,0,Feb 16 14:30:41,ubuntu,kernel:,[ 422.876267] 00
7,0,Feb 16 14:30:41,ubuntu,kernel:,[ 422.876273] 00
7,0,Feb 16 14:30:41,ubuntu,kernel:,[ 422.876279] 00
7,0,Feb 16 14:30:41,ubuntu,kernel:,[ 422.876285]
instead of the desired:
7,0,Feb 16 14:30:41,ubuntu,kernel:,[ 422.876236] Command
TEST_UNIT_READY (6 bytes)
7,0,Feb 16 14:30:41,ubuntu,kernel:,[ 422.876242] bytes:
7,0,Feb 16 14:30:41,ubuntu,kernel:,[ 422.876249] 00 00 00 00 00 00
this is why I think the US_DEBUGPX() macro is still needed.
Regards,
Victor Dodon.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists