Re: [PATCH] ALSA: get rid of CONFIG_SND_VERBOSE_PRINTK

[Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>]

At Tue, 04 Jun 2013 23:15:21 -0700,
Joe Perches wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 2013-06-05 at 08:04 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > At Tue, 4 Jun 2013 16:54:12 -0400 (EDT), Alan Stern wrote:
> > > On Tue, 4 Jun 2013, Joe Perches wrote:
> []
> > > You didn't respond to the first point I raised.  Since these messages
> > > are all meant for debugging, there's no point allowing them to have
> > > prefixes like KERN_ERR or KERN_INFO.  They should always be printed at
> > > the KERN_DEBUG level.  Or did you think this was so obviously true that
> > > it didn't require any comment?
> > 
> > Unfortunately, it's not so straightforward.  Many messages are better
> > with KERN_INFO indeed.  In such places, snd_printd() is used rather as
> > snd_chattier_printk_with_prefix().
> 
> In those cases, it's likely true that most of those
> should not be snd_printd but promoted to pr_<level>

Yes.  These are snd_printd() just to be conditionally built in.
But in most cases it's rather useful to print them (as most distros
set CONFIG_SND_DEBUG=y).  Hence practically they can be pr_info()
nowadays.


> > Instead, we tended to put such informational messages as snd_printd(),
> > while keeping the driver itself reticent as much as possible for
> > "productive" systems.  This style was kept for a while even after
> > merged to 2.5 kernels until recently.
> >
> > Also, some places use KERN_WARNING or KERN_ERR with snd_printd(),
> > mostly because they are in the context with CONFIG_SND_DEBUG.
> > They can be well pr_warning() or pr_err().
> 
> I thought the idea was to rationalize all that with
> the new printing styles.  So on the whole, it seems
> we are agreeing strongly.

Yep, we can convert almost all snd_printk() with pr_*(), and usual
snd_printd() with pr_debug().  There must be some exceptions, and they
need care manually.


Takashi