[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAAW3YpYHo=PZk_AHVD8O6E+D+Ky=LSQpWQ6gBPYCt5rRGEMXXQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2018 13:33:35 -0700
From: Todd Poynor <toddpoynor@...gle.com>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: "toddpoynor@...il.com" <toddpoynor@...il.com>,
Rob Springer <rspringer@...gle.com>, benchan@...omium.org,
devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] staging: gasket: core: debug log updates
On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 12:34 AM Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 09:59:17PM -0700, Todd Poynor wrote:
> > From: Todd Poynor <toddpoynor@...gle.com>
> >
> > Add debug logs for device enable/disable events,
>
> Why?
>
> What is going to need this?
As one of the few people actually developing for Apex chips (but this
may be more soon), I ran into a situation where I cared about this.
But I usually cobble together custom debugging for development
situations, and generally don't get debug logs for
released-in-the-wild drivers, so I'm fine not including these or any
other debug logs.
It sounds like debug logs face a pretty high bar for acceptance. I'm
happy to send a patch removing all of 'em from gasket/apex if that's
preferred.
> > remove logs for
> > callbacks (the called functions can generate their own logs if needed).
>
> That's a different thing than "adding" them, so shouldn't this really be
> 2 patches? If it was, I could have accepted this patch already, and
> ignored the "add new logs" one :)
Sure, the callbacks most frequently occur during disable/enable events
and were linked in my brain, but will send a new patch to just remove
the useless callback logs.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists