From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264527AbTDPScf (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Apr 2003 14:32:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264533AbTDPScf (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Apr 2003 14:32:35 -0400 Received: from air-2.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:30429 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264527AbTDPSce (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Apr 2003 14:32:34 -0400 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 11:42:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Patrick Mochel X-X-Sender: mochel@cherise To: Daniel Stekloff cc: "Randy.Dunlap" , Martin Hicks , , , , , Subject: Re: [patch] printk subsystems In-Reply-To: <200304141533.18779.dsteklof@us.ibm.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Would the debug level be for the entire subsystem? Do you think people would > like to be able to set debug/logging level per driver or device, and not just > subsystem? I can see a use for doing per-object debug levels, but I'd rather not add the overhead to every object, especially when it would be used by a small minority of the populace. Such a flag could easily be placed in the subsystem-specific object, and accessed through the logging/debugging wrappers. > Is debugging level here the same as logging level? Yes. > I like the idea of having logging levels, which include debug, defined by > subsystem. Each subsystem will have separate requirements for logging. > Networking, for instance, already has the NETIF_MSG* levels defined in > netdevice.h that can be set with Ethtool. I can see, for example, having the > msg_enable not in the private data as it is now but in the subsystem or class > structure for that device, such as in struct net_device. This could easily be > exported through sysfs. It would be nice. Unfortunately, it's only a nifty pipe-dream at the moment, unless some lucky volunteer would like to step forward. ;) -pat