From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joe Perches Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] net: mac80211: Neaten debugging Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 08:43:24 -0700 Message-ID: <1337183004.4818.2.camel@joe2Laptop> References: <1337106548.15553.8.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> <20120516.012319.1903390658912592000.davem@davemloft.net> <1337155171.4367.2.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> <1337181771.4818.0.camel@joe2Laptop> <1337182220.18519.5.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Miller , linville@tuxdriver.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Johannes Berg Return-path: Received: from perches-mx.perches.com ([206.117.179.246]:54253 "EHLO labridge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750983Ab2EPPnY (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 May 2012 11:43:24 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1337182220.18519.5.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 2012-05-16 at 17:30 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Wed, 2012-05-16 at 08:22 -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-05-16 at 09:59 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > I wonder if it makes sense to leave these under > > > #ifdef though? Why #ifdef something if it's going to be invisible most > > > of the time anyway? > > > > I don't understand your point. > > #ifdef removal is a good thing. > > Yeah, but you left a lot of them under ifdef, and I'm wondering why you > didn't remove them, or if you should, or ... Those mostly use other different #ifdef CONFIG_SOME_OTHER_CONTROL elements. There are I think 3 that I left because they do not use printk/pr_level but use wiphy_ or netdev_.