Re: __FUNCTION__

[Vladimir Kondratiev <vladimir.kondratiev@intel.com>]

Ian S. Nelson wrote:

> I suspect this might be about as religious an issue as there is but 
> has anyone thought about coming up with some "standard" debugging 
> macros, perhaps something that can be configured at compile time from 
> the configuration for everyone to use everywhere?  I've got my own 
> debug macros,  essentially a printk with the file, function and line 
> added wrapped in #ifdef DEBUG.  I've seen several other schemes in 
> other parts of the kernel and now some of them aren't correct.
>
> I guess what I would envision is some kind of debug menu item in the 
> configuration tool that let's you select if you want messages, and/or 
> filenames, and/or line numbers, and/or function names, or nothing at 
> all.   They could still be controlled at the module level by defining 
> or not defining some constant.   It just seems kind of pointless to 
> have 10-20 different macros or methods that all do the same thing for 
> different parts of the kernel. 
> Ian
>
I am fully agree with idea of one set of debug/info/warn/etc. macros.
My main point in prev. posting was to fix __FUNCTION__, for USB this 
seems to be easy doable since there is already subsystem-wide dbg() and 
alike macros. Actually, there is no sense for __FUNCTION__ to appear 
outside macros; in real code it provides no added value (except easy 
cut-n-paste from function to function).