[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMRc=Mc_bw40uY68jcPYR-Lwe-qLcxmQeZO47WrexZtSiE_M5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2022 15:49:42 +0100
From: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
Jianqun Xu <jay.xu@...k-chips.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: Drop CONFIG_DEBUG_GPIO
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 3:38 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 4:55 AM Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > Description: it says nothing about enabling extra printk()s. But -DDEBUG
> > does just that; it turns on every dev_dbg()/pr_debug() that would
> > otherwise be silent.
>
> Which is what some and I are using a lot during development.
>
AFAIK this: https://www.kernel.org/doc/local/pr_debug.txt is the right
way to do it?
https://www.kernel.org/doc/local/pr_debug.txt
This doesn't mention adding Kconfig options just to enable debug messages.
> ...
>
> > -ccflags-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_GPIO) += -DDEBUG
> > -
>
> NAK to this change.
>
> I'm not against enabling might_sleep() unconditionally.
>
These are already controlled by CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP, no? Or
maybe I can't parse that double negation.
Bart
Powered by blists - more mailing lists