linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] venus: Make debug infrastructure more flexible

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]

Date:   Mon, 15 Jun 2020 12:55:29 +0300
From:   Stanimir Varbanov <stanimir.varbanov@...aro.org>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] venus: Make debug infrastructure more flexible

Hi Greg,

On 6/14/20 9:37 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 01:39:18AM +0300, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
>>  	if (slot == -1) {
>> -		dev_dbg(inst->core->dev, "%s: no free slot\n", __func__);
>> +		VDBGH("no free slot for timestamp\n");
> 
> Again, no, you just lost a lot of valuable information by changing to a
> different format (like driver, specific device, etc.).  Please don't do
> this, it just makes the information less than before.

OK, one of the reasons to use pr_debug inside VDBGH macro is to avoid
having struct device *dev variable in every function with dev_dbg even
when the function doesn't use it.

Are you fine with s/pr_debug/dev_dbg in VDBGX macros?

-- 
regards,
Stan