From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Woodhouse To: "Artem B. Bityuckiy" In-Reply-To: <4195EF83.8050104@yandex.ru> References: <4195EF83.8050104@yandex.ru> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 11:38:19 +0000 Message-Id: <1100345900.8015.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: JFFS2 prints List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sat, 2004-11-13 at 14:26 +0300, Artem B. Bityuckiy wrote: > But the main thing why I think it would be nice to introduce macros like > these is that the messages will be a bit standard. I mean that all > errors will have the same prefix. It is useful when you develop JFFS2 > with debugging output on. In this case you will just s/JFFS2 Error and > see all the error messages. But currently, it is hard to find all the > error messages in JFFS2 because some of them use prefix "Error", some > just contain the word "failed", etc. I'm not sure that just a standard prefix will really help with debugging. The trick is still to know what's important, and what's noise. And running it with full debugging is slow enough already over a 115200 baud serial line, without adding more stuff to each line :) I'd much rather see an effort to weed out the unnecessary prints at debug level 1, moving them to level 2. I don't consider level 2 to be particularly useful in general; it's _too_ verbose. -- dwmw2