From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from perches-mx.perches.com ([206.117.179.246]:42483 "EHLO labridge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752456Ab2CTDsD (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Mar 2012 23:48:03 -0400 Message-ID: <1332215281.7847.54.camel@joe2Laptop> (sfid-20120320_044917_101312_D04E0032) Subject: Re: [PATCH wireless-next 2/3] ath5k: Introduce _ath5k_printk to reduce code/text From: Joe Perches To: Adrian Chadd Cc: Jiri Slaby , Nick Kossifidis , "Luis R. Rodriguez" , Bob Copeland , "John W. Linville" , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, ath5k-devel@lists.ath5k.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 20:48:01 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: <1332134336.23125.60.camel@joe2Laptop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 2012-03-19 at 20:39 -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote: > On 18 March 2012 22:18, Joe Perches wrote: > >> Otherwise compiling in debugging will cause a _lot_ of spurious > >> register reads to occur that are then tossed. This was one of the big > >> reasons for instability and slow performance when AH_DEBUG was > >> enabled. > > That doesn't make any sense in this case. > > > > It's either a call to printk or _ath5_printk > > but it's still a call to a function. > > The FreeBSD HAL used to be like this. I changed it so it didn't > evaluate the arguments before it figured out whether or not to do the > (k)printf(). > > I'm just pointing it out as you're (currently) knee deep in the > debugging code and it may be useful for you to also think about > implementing. I see, thanks for the heads-up. The no_printk function could/does eval args and can cause those sorts of issues. So care does need to be used. cheers, Joe