From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joe Perches Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/12] scsi/NCR5380: fix debugging macros and #include structure Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 17:47:52 -0700 Message-ID: <1395190072.8649.2.camel@joe-AO722> References: <20140318002822.372705594@telegraphics.com.au> <1395112756.20860.1.camel@joe-AO722> <1395146702.2812.47.camel@joe-AO722> <1395148051.2812.51.camel@joe-AO722> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-m68k-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Finn Thain Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven , "James E.J. Bottomley" , scsi , Sam Creasey , Russell King , Michael Schmitz , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Linux/m68k List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2014-03-19 at 10:14 +1100, Finn Thain wrote: > As for side-effects, chip register accesses would be affected if dprintk() > expanded to no_printk() when NDEBUG & flg == 0. > > E.g. NCR5380.c line 1213: > dprintk(NDEBUG_INTR, "scsi : unknown interrupt, BASR 0x%X, MR 0x%X, SR 0x%x\n", > basr, NCR5380_read(MODE_REG), NCR5380_read(STATUS_REG)); > > I don't want to re-introduce side-effects into a dozen different NCR5380 > drivers on three different architectures when I can test only one of those > drivers. It's difficult to get good code coverage even for one driver. Hi again Finn. If dprintk expanded directly to no_printk, then true. But using "if (0)" prevents the no_printk from occurring at all so there would be no side-effects and the format & args would still be verified by the compiler. So I believe you shouldn't worry about side-effects. cheers, Joe