From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: regarding ata_msg_*() Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 12:23:30 +0900 Message-ID: <44A0A4B2.7010001@gmail.com> References: <449E7FB9.4080305@gmail.com> <20060626074132.GA10695@gollum.tnic> <449F9427.1080806@gmail.com> <20060626083459.GA13039@gollum.tnic> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from nz-out-0102.google.com ([64.233.162.203]:34499 "EHLO nz-out-0102.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933331AbWF0DXh (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Jun 2006 23:23:37 -0400 Received: by nz-out-0102.google.com with SMTP id o1so83186nzf for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 20:23:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20060626083459.GA13039@gollum.tnic> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Borislav Petkov Cc: Jeff Garzik , "linux-ide@vger.kernel.org" Borislav Petkov wrote: >> My suggestion is to keep the current (pre-msg_enable) model for the >> first conversion and categorize debug messages further after that. So, >> message categories will be... >> >> ATA_MSG_ERR >> ATA_MSG_WARN >> ATA_MSG_INFO >> -------------> all above are enabled by default >> ATA_MSG_DEBUG >> ATA_MSG_VDEBUG >> >> Then, you have 1-to-1 mapping w/ the existing messages. You can simply >> incorporate message enabled tests into ata_*_printk() functions and the >> conversion would be trivial. >> >> After that's complete, we can diversify ATA_MSG_DEBUG and ATA_MSG_VDEBUG >> by separating out chatty ones out. e.g. you can separate out SG >> mapping/unmapping (including padding) debug messages, which produce >> massive amount of logs when enabled, into ATA_MSG_SG or something. >> After several such separations, debug messages should be quite >> manageable && the categories wouldn't be too elaborate. > > Yes, this sounds logical, I like it, it really fits libata more but at the time > I made that msg classification I kinda wanted to stick closely to Becker's > initial implementation :). But you're perfectly right, this is the way to go so > I'll do that after reading what the others have to say. However, as I said > before, IMHO it would be of higher priority now to convert to this new scheme > and changing the dbg levels later would be trivial once we got all of libata > done. Jeff, what do you think? Borislav, can you restore configuration messages in ata_dev_configure()? Those messages need to be printed. Thanks. -- tejun