From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wr1-f49.google.com (mail-wr1-f49.google.com [209.85.221.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11716173 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 20:56:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wr1-f49.google.com with SMTP id o3so29105731wrh.10 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 12:56:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=philpotter-co-uk.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=NH00wvgzSBu075ZlsRFt1eAfhX6GcrnxDSDE9TnCjtE=; b=fHaJAlljhP2NPoLA1IsGrrExlEisLMnvA2pphAZUHGUjYOP6HHSxbYhnHcHAtK3nRT jG1Mp9EvF/dKdqgh+VG/9UuBtP1+Y2UHoA9mIEMOhttkodV7F7pcVKb3OGnMEqvLnifF hYLCQp6Nh0aRUcXMIzuDfh9zHlC/8cHBQpNIREpGJTMTbi8Qagt96DetpLuOJuFfz5rZ lhITB9gYByn4l9VEtwCABrdDTIV1qhZxb9Y1G3VsG8dqmqLb5TWATNyjDaVfhZUzk2Pa UF57vJzE6KGF/ThdG80S0e7h7V7sYnTbN5gEPg+ipzqqYefXzCcp5x2rG5UtpWb4VxJ3 OWag== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=NH00wvgzSBu075ZlsRFt1eAfhX6GcrnxDSDE9TnCjtE=; b=GXWHd+LVM5aIgZuvQzkZD5vHs9gouvAinOc5sMktquWoqS18veNTTkph/huT3Ze4Sn 3rgE3p3TlWXvfHHbOTJPoVOitLDvfQmSIocn+RYQhpyjHDkOXhrR4kdo9Ek06WRr3Mzd AWtmsZBJZzTk3r0SWav7uJKslOyeM/JIivADCV8AlW6uTchL+wgYSsPc1/zW9WeecBWX YlUjJS5NBR3IvLy1OKyGuGgLSPsPwh9TbPw/ZhSW+2XpfWtqlXVNMU8W5k2oId8YYuJW LBh3zr5LLdkGxDEV6VTjrOuCE8sI/DhmHTYIluMdm3a724c0MrYDZJY+p5jTjFixmqgk WllA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530bE6YBQ3w4k+SAZ5R3N+hmPnKSp9j1bxXxlea+sI8e9013O0yz 2nw5eWpMoyIAU1OyH/oaU8OqEA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJys17cBO+N6fWfnZJiSmxn+PAF0SxFfWG5jY3SMFiSjvHV2cbjLdn/b6eW4S15O5I9L+u0r7g== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:4c4d:: with SMTP id n13mr1104632wrt.641.1641848164366; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 12:56:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from equinox (2.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.a.1.e.e.d.f.d.0.b.8.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.arpa. [2001:8b0:dfde:e1a0::2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p18sm7999858wmq.23.2022.01.10.12.56.03 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 10 Jan 2022 12:56:03 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 20:56:02 +0000 From: Phillip Potter To: Dan Carpenter Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net, straube.linux@gmail.com, martin@kaiser.cx, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] staging: r8188eu: convert DBG_88E calls in core/rtw_iol.c Message-ID: References: <20220109215427.887-1-phil@philpotter.co.uk> <20220109215427.887-4-phil@philpotter.co.uk> <20220110100843.GC1951@kadam> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-staging@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220110100843.GC1951@kadam> On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 01:08:43PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Sun, Jan 09, 2022 at 09:54:23PM +0000, Phillip Potter wrote: > > Convert the DBG_88E macro calls in core/rtw_iol.c to use pr_debug > > or netdev_dbg appropriately, as their information may be useful to > > observers, and this gets the driver closer to the point of being > > able to remove DBG_88E itself. > > > > Some calls are at points in the call chain where use of dev_dbg or > > netdev_dbg isn't possible due to lack of device pointer, so plain > > pr_debug is appropriate here. > > > > Signed-off-by: Phillip Potter > > --- > > drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_iol.c | 10 ++++++---- > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_iol.c b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_iol.c > > index 7e78b47c1284..923da2a9f6ae 100644 > > --- a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_iol.c > > +++ b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_iol.c > > @@ -12,13 +12,15 @@ struct xmit_frame *rtw_IOL_accquire_xmit_frame(struct adapter *adapter) > > > > xmit_frame = rtw_alloc_xmitframe(pxmitpriv); > > if (!xmit_frame) { > > - DBG_88E("%s rtw_alloc_xmitframe return null\n", __func__); > > + netdev_dbg(adapter->pnetdev, > > + "rtw_alloc_xmitframe return null\n"); > > You're going to have to send this anyway because of the compile issue. > > I feel like you are not being aggressive enough in the debug messages > that you delete. For example, this one should definitely be deleted. > Don't print an error message for alloc failures. > > It would be easier to Ack a mass delete of these messages. > > regards, > dan carpenter > Dear Dan, Thank you for your feedback. I already sent a V2 series to fix the empty case label I left in core/rtw_mlme_ext.c, sounds like a V3 is needed though based on this feedback - admittedly I have tried to be conservative and basically only removed commented DBG_88E calls or calls which just print the function name/line number so far. I get what you're saying about deleting them all just being easier, but I've already converted several in previous series that have made it in. It would make sense to delete these converted calls as well if going for the total deletion approach. Also, I do worry some of the info could be useful. I'd appreciate your thoughts on this. I am happy to delete it all by all means, just want to make sure majority would be happy with that approach, as opposed to a refinement of this approach and being more judicious with deletion of more DBG_88E calls. Thanks again, Phil