Re: ehci dynamic debug problem

[Alan Stern]

On Fri, 13 Apr 2012, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 10:35:59AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Fri, 13 Apr 2012, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> > > 
> > > Does dynamic debug offer an "is the message two lines below enabled" test?
> > > Simply changing the "#ifdef DEBUG" for dbg_port_buf()
> > > to "#if defined(DEBUG) || defined(CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG)"
> > > is probably not acceptable due to the overhead of dbg_port_buf()?
> > 
> > I don't understand your question.  Doesn't dbg_port_buf need to be 
> > defined whenever dynamic debugging is enabled?
> > 
> > Alternatively, the definition of dbg_port_buf (and related routines) in 
> > the !defined(DEBUG) case could be changed; you could add
> > 
> > 	buf[0] = 0;
> > 
> > That way you wouldn't get garbage out, although you wouldn't get 
> > anything useful either.
> 
> The ideal solution I'm looking for gives useful output
> when dynamic debugging is enabled for ehci, but does no
> useless string formatting when CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG is y
> but the dynamic debug for ehci is disabled.

But there is no such thing as dynamic debug for ehci, is there?  
There's a separate dynamic debug setting for each dev_dbg statement.
So your ideal solution makes no sense.

Alan Stern

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/