From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: dprintk() and gdprintk() to be compiled out when NDEBUG Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:40:09 +0000 Message-ID: <1424259609.27775.25.camel@citrix.com> References: <54DB17DC020000780005ED86@mail.emea.novell.com> <1424257100.27775.3.camel@citrix.com> <54E480030200007800061029@mail.emea.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.135]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1YO2zi-0005lX-By for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:40:42 +0000 In-Reply-To: <54E480030200007800061029@mail.emea.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 11:05 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 18.02.15 at 11:58, wrote: > > On Wed, 2015-02-11 at 07:50 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> Quite likely the (mis-)use of these > >> two functions may then temporarily result in messages not meant > >> to be debugging ones to become hidden in non-debug builds. If > >> others agree, I'd try to make one pass through the tree to try to > >> identify such, > > > > Thanks, that would be useful I think. Will you cover arch/arm too? > > I did the patch and the auditing pass already, and I skipped - as > you kind of expected - arch/arm. Since we're not under pressure > and everyone should be doing debug builds right now anyway, I > don't think applying the to-be-posted patch without ARM > adjustments will do much harm; let me know if you think otherwise. No problem, please go ahead and I'll try and find a moment to audit the ARM ones separately. Ian.