netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] ibmvnic: Increase driver logging

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: <20200715.182956.490791427431304861.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Wed, 15 Jul 2020 18:29:56 -0700 (PDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     kuba@...nel.org
Cc:     tlfalcon@...ux.ibm.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, drt@...ux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] ibmvnic: Increase driver logging

From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 17:06:32 -0700

> On Wed, 15 Jul 2020 18:51:55 -0500 Thomas Falcon wrote:
>>  	free_netdev(netdev);
>>  	dev_set_drvdata(&dev->dev, NULL);
>> +	netdev_info(netdev, "VNIC client device has been successfully removed.\n");
> 
> A step too far, perhaps.
> 
> In general this patch looks a little questionable IMHO, this amount of
> logging output is not commonly seen in drivers. All the the info
> messages are just static text, not even carrying any extra information.
> In an era of ftrace, and bpftrace, do we really need this?

Agreed, this is too much.  This is debugging, and thus suitable for tracing
facilities, at best.