Re: [patch 1/1] ipw2100: remove by-hand function entry/exit debugging

Re: [patch 1/1] ipw2100: remove by-hand function entry/exit debugging

[Jeff Garzik]

akpm@osdl.org wrote:
> From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
> 
> This removes debug prints from entry/exit of functions.  Such level of
> debugging should probably be done by gdb or similar.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
> Cc: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
> Cc: "James P. Ketrenos" <ipw2100-admin@linux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>

NAK.  Rationale:  maintainer's choice.  Pavel doesn't get to choose the 
debugger of choice for the driver maintainer.

I do this entry/exit stuff in my net and SATA drivers; printk is my 
primary method of debugging.

	Jeff

Re: [patch 1/1] ipw2100: remove by-hand function entry/exit debugging

[David S. Miller]

From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2005 21:51:21 -0400

> NAK.  Rationale: maintainer's choice.  Pavel doesn't get to choose
> the debugger of choice for the driver maintainer.

If it makes the driver unreadable and thus harder to maintain,
I think such changes should seriously be considered.

Most of the DEBUG_INFO macro usage is fine, but those "enter"
and "exit" ones are just pure noise and should be removed.

Re: [patch 1/1] ipw2100: remove by-hand function entry/exit debugging

[Jeff Garzik]

David S. Miller wrote:
> From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
> Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2005 21:51:21 -0400
> 
> 
>>NAK.  Rationale: maintainer's choice.  Pavel doesn't get to choose
>>the debugger of choice for the driver maintainer.
> 
> 
> If it makes the driver unreadable and thus harder to maintain,
> I think such changes should seriously be considered.
> 
> Most of the DEBUG_INFO macro usage is fine, but those "enter"
> and "exit" ones are just pure noise and should be removed.

I find them useful in my own drivers; they are definitely not pure noise.

	Jeff

Re: [patch 1/1] ipw2100: remove by-hand function entry/exit debugging

[Ingo Oeser]

Hi Jeff,

Jeff Garzik wrote:
> David S. Miller wrote:
> > From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
> > Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2005 21:51:21 -0400
> >
> >>NAK.  Rationale: maintainer's choice.  Pavel doesn't get to choose
> >>the debugger of choice for the driver maintainer.
> >
> > If it makes the driver unreadable and thus harder to maintain,
> > I think such changes should seriously be considered.
> >
> > Most of the DEBUG_INFO macro usage is fine, but those "enter"
> > and "exit" ones are just pure noise and should be removed.
>
> I find them useful in my own drivers; they are definitely not pure noise.

gcc -finstrument-functions

can do that completely without adding noise to the sources.

been there, done that. With a gcc-patch you don't even need to 
resolve symbols.


Regards

Ingo Oeser

Re: [patch 1/1] ipw2100: remove by-hand function entry/exit debugging

[David S. Miller]

From: Ingo Oeser <netdev@axxeo.de>
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 15:39:08 +0200

> Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > I find them useful in my own drivers; they are definitely not pure noise.
> 
> gcc -finstrument-functions

I was going to mention this as well, and also the idea to
enable CONFIG_MCOUNT on a per-file basis.

We should never be doing by hand what can be automated.

Re: [patch 1/1] ipw2100: remove by-hand function entry/exit debugging

[Jeff Garzik]

David S. Miller wrote:
> From: Ingo Oeser <netdev@axxeo.de>
> Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 15:39:08 +0200
> 
> 
>>Jeff Garzik wrote:
>>
>>>I find them useful in my own drivers; they are definitely not pure noise.
>>
>>gcc -finstrument-functions
> 
> 
> I was going to mention this as well, and also the idea to
> enable CONFIG_MCOUNT on a per-file basis.
> 
> We should never be doing by hand what can be automated.


As long as nobody breaks the primary maintainer's primary method of 
debugging, patches are welcome...

	Jeff