From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] ppc: don't override CONFIG_PPC_PSERIES_DEBUG From: Michael Ellerman To: Nishanth Aravamudan In-Reply-To: <20101015002300.GB7522@us.ibm.com> References: <1287078495-11722-1-git-send-email-nacc@us.ibm.com> <1287101663.4194.5.camel@concordia> <20101015002300.GB7522@us.ibm.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-tSfPy+9328y+2YgHwZ1Q" Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 11:29:59 +1100 Message-ID: <1287102599.4194.19.camel@concordia> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: Michael Neuling , Frans Pop , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras , Anton Blanchard , Linas Vepstas , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Thomas Gleixner Reply-To: michael@ellerman.id.au List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --=-tSfPy+9328y+2YgHwZ1Q Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 2010-10-14 at 17:23 -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > On 15.10.2010 [11:14:23 +1100], Michael Ellerman wrote: > > On Thu, 2010-10-14 at 10:48 -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > > > Because the lpar and pci_dlpar code is pretty low-level & verbose, > > > perhaps it makes sense to add another Kconfig variable for really > > > low-level stuff? But it's annoying to have DEBUG *somewhat* effective= , > > > especially in the EEH area when doing PCI stuff. > >=20 > > I really don't think you want to enable the lpar debug by default. > > Have you tried it? It can make for a pretty unusable system, just > > because of the console spam. >=20 > Yeah, you're right. After enabling it, I had to kill my boot and start > over w/o the lpar DEBUG on.=20 :) > I assume dlpar_pci is similar? That should be OK to enable I think. Suck it and see I guess. > I dunno, would a patch to a least remove the EEH one be ok? Seems like > it isn't super-verbose, and does have some handy output. Yeah definitely. That undef was merged as part of a cleanup/fix patch but shouldn't have been. cheers --=-tSfPy+9328y+2YgHwZ1Q Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAky3oIcACgkQdSjSd0sB4dKfFQCeLnSxqXlvtumQg3VnB6/1eFk0 6FEAn0bxW+zpGzjjTgBJfw1Wn/2Dn3Bd =zsJD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-tSfPy+9328y+2YgHwZ1Q--