From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: From: Marek Lindner Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 18:03:22 +0200 References: <201006231620.11058.lindner_marek@yahoo.de> <1277302839-20197-1-git-send-email-lindner_marek@yahoo.de> <20100623152359.GL15420@lunn.ch> In-Reply-To: <20100623152359.GL15420@lunn.ch> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201006231803.22675.lindner_marek@yahoo.de> Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCH 1/2] batman-adv: add routing debug log accessible via debugfs Reply-To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking List-Id: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org On Wednesday 23 June 2010 17:23:59 Andrew Lunn wrote: > > - if (bat_debug_type(type)) \ > > - printk(KERN_DEBUG "batman-adv:" fmt, ## arg); \ > > did you think about keeping this? Maybe use some of the spare bits of > debug to indicate what goes into the circular buffer and what goes to > the kernel log? > > I don't see the two schemes are mutually exclusive. "Normal" kernel > hackers will look in the normal kernel logging places and could be a > bit surprised when its not there. Sven is in the progress of revising the "ordinary" printks to make them more "kernel-ish". Or do you think that normal kernel hackers would be interested in seeing the routing debug messages in the standard kernel log as well ? Regards, Marek