Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/e820: Use pr_debug to avoid spamming dmesg log with debug messages

[Jason Baron]

On 5/14/21 1:38 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Tue, 2021-05-11 at 17:31 -0400, Jason Baron wrote:
> 
>> That said, I do see the value in not having to open code the branch stuff, and
>> making pr_debug() consistent with printk which does return a value. So that
>> makes sense to me.
> 
> IMO: printk should not return a value.
> 

Ok, the issue we are trying to resolve is to control whether a 'pr_debug()' statement
is enabled and thus use that to control subsequent output. The proposed patch does:


+	printed = pr_debug("e820: update [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx] ", start, end - 1);
+	if (printed > 0) {
+		e820_print_type(old_type);
+		pr_cont(" ==> ");
+		e820_print_type(new_type);
+		pr_cont("\n");
+	}

I do think pr_debug() here is different from printk() b/c it can be explicitly
toggled.

I also suggested an alternative, which is possible with the current code which
is to use DYNAMIC_DEBUG_BRANCH().

if (DYNAMIC_DEBUG_BRANCH(e820_debg)) {
    printk(KERN_DEBUG "e820: update [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx] ", start, end - 1);
    e820_print_type(old_type);
    pr_cont(" ==> ");
    e820_print_type(new_type);
    pr_cont("\n");
}

That however does require one to do something like this first:

DEFINE_DYNAMIC_DEBUG_METADATA(e820_dbg, "e820 verbose mode");

So I don't feel too strongly either way, but maybe others do?

Thanks,

-Jason