From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Kok, Auke" Subject: Re: [E1000-devel] [PATCH 6/8] e1000e: convert ndev_ printks to something smaller Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2008 11:55:46 -0700 Message-ID: <47F3D6B2.9070306@intel.com> References: <20080328161503.6562.44329.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <20080328161531.6562.8515.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <47EDA38F.6080301@garzik.org> <47F12F27.802@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff Garzik Return-path: Received: from mga03.intel.com ([143.182.124.21]:64175 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755108AbYDBS4a (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Apr 2008 14:56:30 -0400 In-Reply-To: <47F12F27.802@intel.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Kok, Auke wrote: > Jeff Garzik wrote: >> Auke Kok wrote: >>> From: Bruce Allan >>> >>> The ndev_* printk's are too lenghty and we don't need to specify >>> the adapter/netdev struct at all, making this a lot more readable. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Bruce Allan >>> Signed-off-by: Auke Kok >>> --- >>> >>> drivers/net/e1000e/e1000.h | 27 ++++---- >>> drivers/net/e1000e/ethtool.c | 38 +++++------ >>> drivers/net/e1000e/netdev.c | 148 +++++++++++++++++++----------------------- >>> drivers/net/e1000e/param.c | 31 +++------ >>> 4 files changed, 108 insertions(+), 136 deletions(-) >> This stuff should just be removed. >> >> Either the code should be outputting "ethX: blahblah" via printk(), or >> the code should be outputting the standard dev_printk() prefix [driver >> name, PCI device info]. >> >> Also, it is recommended to use the NETIF_MSG_xxx bits to permit >> fine-grained control over which messages are output, on a per-port basis >> (controlled via ethtool). grep around for 'msg_enable' > > yes and I even tried pushing for a generic netdev printk that incorporates the > msg_enable bits properly > > I also got absolutely unwelcome responses to that, if not none :) > > once we get such a thing, we can incorporate this into e1000 with this patch by > changing 2 lines. so I think this patch is still a good thing, and it certainly > removes a lot of wrapped lines. Jeff, I'm not sure how to proceed with this mess cleanup so I'm removing that patch from the series I sent, and I will revisit this issue later. I'm resending the ones I have sent once but are on hold pending this discussion. They are all meant for #upstream and should apply OK. thanks, Auke