10:18 a.m.
On Sat, 2015-05-23 at 00:07 +0000, Drokin, Oleg wrote:
On May 22, 2015, at 7:57 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-05-22 at 21:16 +0000, Drokin, Oleg wrote:
>> On May 22, 2015, at 11:42 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2015-05-22 at 08:08 +0000, Drokin, Oleg wrote:
>>>> On May 22, 2015, at 1:06 AM, Julia Lawall wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 21 May 2015, Michael Shuey wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> That's a task (of many) I've been putting on the back
burner until the code
>>>>>> is cleaner. It's also a HUGE change, since there are debug
macros
>>>>>> everywhere, and they all check a #define'd mask to see if
they should fire,
>>>>>> and the behavior is likely governed by parts of the lustre user
land tools
>>>>>> as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Suggestions are welcome. Do other parts of the linux kernel
define complex
>>>>>> debugging macros like these, or is this a lustre-ism? Any
suggestions on
>>>>>> how to handle this more in line with existing drivers?
>>>>>
>>>>> Once you decide what to do, you can use Coccinelle to make the
changes for
>>>>> you. So you shouldn't be put off by the number of code sites to
change.
>>>>>
>>>>> The normal functions are pr_err, pr_warn, etc. Perhaps you can
follow
>>>>> Joe's suggestions if you really need something more
complicated.
>>>>
>>>> Ideally leaving CERROR/CDEBUG in Lustre would be desirable from my
perspective.
>>>
>>> My issue with CERROR is the name is little misleading.
>>> It's actually a debugging message.
>>> #define CERROR(format, ...) CDEBUG_LIMIT(D_ERROR, format, ## __VA_ARGS__)
>>
>> Except it's not a debugging message.
>> There is a clear distinction.
>
> Not really. If the first reading shows that the mechanism it
> goes through is called CDEBUG, a reasonable expectation should
> be that it's a debugging message.
Well, various pr_err/pr_dbg for example, go through printk in the end too.
Do that make them the same?
No, because each is labeled with the KERN_<level> that it uses.
[]
>> I wonder what is more clear about that in your opinion ve
>> lustre_error/lustre_debug?
>
> The fact that you have to explain this shows that it's
> at least misleading unless you completely understand the
> code.
Or you know, you might take the function name at the face value
and assume that CERROR means it's an error and CDEBUG means it's a debug message?
Maybe, but I think that it'd be better if the mechanism
it uses was more plainly named something like lustre_log.