Re: [PATCH 2/6] Staging: hv: hv.c Removed all DPRINT and debug - using pr_err now

Greg KH
2011-02-23T21:57:14Z

On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 07:41:28PM +0000, Hank Janssen wrote:
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Greg KH [mailto:greg@kroah.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 11:16 AM
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 03:32:41PM -0800, Hank Janssen wrote:
> > > This group of patches removes all DPRINT from hv_vmbus.ko.
> > > It is divided in several patches due to size.
> > >
> > > All DPRINT calls have been removed, and where needed have been
> > > replaced with pr_XX native calls. Many debug DPRINT calls have
> > > been removed outright.
> > >
> > > The amount of clutter this driver prints has been
> > > significantly reduced.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Hank Janssen <hjanssen@microsoft.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: K. Y. Srinivasan <kys@microsoft.com>
> > >
> > > ---
> > > drivers/staging/hv/hv.c | 88 +++++++++++--------------------------
> > ---------
> > > 1 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 67 deletions(-)
>
> > > - DPRINT_INFO(VMBUS, "OS Build:%d-%d.%d-%d-%d.%d",\
> > > - eax,
> > > - ebx >> 16,
> > > - ebx & 0xFFFF,
> > > - ecx,
> > > - edx >> 24,
> > > - edx & 0xFFFFFF);
> > > +
> > > + pr_info("%s: Hyper-V Host OS Build:%d-%d.%d-%d-%d.%d",
> > > + VMBUS_MOD,
> > > + eax,
> > > + ebx >> 16,
> > > + ebx & 0xFFFF,
> > > + ecx,
> > > + edx >> 24,
> > > + edx & 0xFFFFFF);
> >
> > Why did you keep this one? Why is it needed?
>
> This tells me what version the host is running. I frequently ask customers if
> they are running on Host version X or Y. This tells me that with certainty
> what they are running. The number of times I got from a customer that
> they are running X while I knew that would not be possible has been pretty
> high.

Ok, fair enough.

> > > if (!query_hypervisor_presence()) {
> > > - DPRINT_ERR(VMBUS, "No Windows hypervisor detected!!");
> > > + pr_err("%s: %s No Hyper-V detected", VMBUS_MOD, __func__);
> >
> > Why the __func__? That should never be needed as it is trivial to see
> > what is happening, the user doesn't need to know the function name,
> > right?
> >
> > Please remove them from all of these calls.
>
> The new patch will have these removed. When I checked other drivers
> in the drivers subdirectory the __func__ is used 15455 times most
> of these are in print, debug or error lines. The __func__ in this
> case only shows up if an error occurs.
>
> But as requested, I will remove them.

Thanks.

> > Oh, and you obviously didn't test these patches as your syslog would be
> > a mess if you did. Which is NOT ok, and makes me grumpy:
> > http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/maintainer-05.html
> >
> > bah, I should just make a numbered list and just start saying: "This
> > patch fails point #4" or something like that, it would save me in
> > typing...
> >
>
> They where compile and run tested. And syslog was not a mess. What did
> I mess up here? The amount of printouts now are a fraction of what they
> where before.

You forgot to put '\n' at the end of all of your pr_XXX lines, so they
will be merged with the next one, messing up your syslog. Joe also
pointed this problem out.

Take a look at your syslog to see what I am talking about...

thanks,

greg k-h