From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Jones Subject: Re: [PATCH] Improve acpi_dbg_level= documentation Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 18:35:13 -0400 Message-ID: <20070418223513.GA20204@redhat.com> References: <200704181221.37897.ak@suse.de> <20070418080812.0f7f559a.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> <200704181626.21213.lenb@kernel.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:46364 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2992899AbXDRWgd (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Apr 2007 18:36:33 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200704181626.21213.lenb@kernel.org> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Len Brown Cc: Randy Dunlap , Andi Kleen , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 04:26:20PM -0400, Len Brown wrote: > lenb@nx6325:~> cat /sys/module/acpi/parameters/debug_level > Description Hex SET > ACPI_LV_ERROR 0x00000001 [*] > ACPI_LV_WARN 0x00000002 [*] > ACPI_LV_INIT 0x00000004 [*] > ACPI_LV_DEBUG_OBJECT 0x00000008 [*] > ACPI_LV_INFO 0x00000010 [ ] > ACPI_LV_INIT_NAMES 0x00000020 [ ] > ACPI_LV_PARSE 0x00000040 [ ] > ACPI_LV_LOAD 0x00000080 [ ] > ACPI_LV_DISPATCH 0x00000100 [ ] > ACPI_LV_EXEC 0x00000200 [ ] > ACPI_LV_NAMES 0x00000400 [ ] > ACPI_LV_OPREGION 0x00000800 [ ] > ACPI_LV_BFIELD 0x00001000 [ ] > ACPI_LV_TABLES 0x00002000 [ ] > ACPI_LV_VALUES 0x00004000 [ ] > ACPI_LV_OBJECTS 0x00008000 [ ] > ACPI_LV_RESOURCES 0x00010000 [ ] > ACPI_LV_USER_REQUESTS 0x00020000 [ ] > ACPI_LV_PACKAGE 0x00040000 [ ] > ACPI_LV_ALLOCATIONS 0x00100000 [ ] > ACPI_LV_FUNCTIONS 0x00200000 [ ] > ACPI_LV_OPTIMIZATIONS 0x00400000 [ ] > ACPI_LV_MUTEX 0x01000000 [ ] > ACPI_LV_THREADS 0x02000000 [ ] > ACPI_LV_IO 0x04000000 [ ] > ACPI_LV_INTERRUPTS 0x08000000 [ ] > ACPI_LV_AML_DISASSEMBLE 0x10000000 [ ] > ACPI_LV_VERBOSE_INFO 0x20000000 [ ] > ACPI_LV_FULL_TABLES 0x40000000 [ ] > ACPI_LV_EVENTS 0x80000000 [ ] > -- > debug_level = 0x0000000F (* = enabled) Seems to violate the 'one value per file' rule. ok, it's one value broken down into its component parts, but still, it's a bit ott, and we don't do similar expansion for other bitmasks in sysfs do we? Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk