Re: [PATCH][RFC 2/23]: SCST core

Sam Ravnborg
2008-12-11T21:08:15Z

>
> >> drivers/scst/scst_lib.c | 3689
> >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> drivers/scst/scst_main.c | 1919 +++++++++++++++++++
> >> drivers/scst/scst_module.c | 69
> >> drivers/scst/scst_priv.h | 513 +++++
> >> drivers/scst/scst_targ.c | 5458
> >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> 8 files changed, 12435 insertions(+)
> >
> >There was a lot af TRACE_ENTRY() / TRACE_EXIT() noise.
> >We should have proper tools for that by now (I hope).
>
> Sorry, I don't see such tools with, for instance, a possibility to be
> compiled out in non-debug builds.
>
> From one side, I can agree, those TRACE_ENTRY()/TRACE_EXIT() statements
> *may* look like a noise (I personally don't notice them), but, from
> other side, in past times they have proved how usable they are. If an
> SCST user has a problem, I simply ask him to make a debug build, then
> enable entry_exit and some other logging levels, then reproduce the
> problem and send me the logs. Then in most cases I can see what's wrong
> and provide a fix without additional actions and questions.

I had ftrace in mind but it has not hit mainline yet.
But will do before this patchset does.

>
> >We often ask for exported symbols to be documented - so one has
> >a slight idea of their purpose.
>
> They are documented, near their prototypes in the public header files,
> particularly, scst.h. It was done so, because it was supposed that one,
> writing a target driver or dev handler will have on hands the header
> files, not source code.
>
> Should we move those comments from the functions prototypes to the
> functions definitions?
If there will be multiple implmentations of the same prototype
we generally recommend to stick the comment in a .H file.
But otherwise keep it close to the source it describe with the
minimal hope that it gets updated.

Oh - and we do not distribute a stripped down headers only
version of the kernel. Users will see full kernel source.

Sam