linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] staging: wlan-ng: remove commented debug printk messages

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: <Y1Mf7IVccbst10iP@debian-BULLSEYE-live-builder-AMD64>
Date:   Sat, 22 Oct 2022 04:10:44 +0530
From:   Deepak R Varma <drv@...lo.com>
To:     Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>
Cc:     outreachy@...ts.linux.dev, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] staging: wlan-ng: remove commented debug printk
 messages

On Sun, Oct 23, 2022 at 08:35:47PM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2022 at 01:03:42AM +0530, Deepak R Varma wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/p80211netdev.c b/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/p80211netdev.c
> > index e04fc666d218..6bef419e8ad0 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/p80211netdev.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/p80211netdev.c
> > @@ -881,55 +881,42 @@ static int p80211_rx_typedrop(struct wlandevice *wlandev, u16 fc)
> >  		wlandev->rx.mgmt++;
> >  		switch (fstype) {
> >  		case WLAN_FSTYPE_ASSOCREQ:
> > -			/* printk("assocreq"); */
> >  			wlandev->rx.assocreq++;
> >  			break;
> >  			wlandev->rx.ctl_unknown++;
> >  			break;
> >  		}
> > -		/* printk("\n"); */
> >  		drop = 2;
> >  		break;
> >
> > @@ -1007,7 +986,6 @@ static int p80211_rx_typedrop(struct wlandevice *wlandev, u16 fc)
> >  			wlandev->rx.cfack_cfpoll++;
> >  			break;
> >  		default:
> > -			/* printk("unknown"); */
> >  			wlandev->rx.data_unknown++;
> >  			break;
> >  		}
>
> Shouldn't these printks be guarded under CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL instead?

Hi Sanjaya,
Sure they can, but I think they are very basic tracing message and do not appear
to carry much of information useful the event of debugging. Do you have a
suggestion on what additional information may be added to make them more useful?

If you still think we should have then in the CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL guard, let me
know and I will attempt to improve these.

Thank you,
./drv

>
> --
> An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara