[lustre-devel] [PATCH v4 10/13] staging: lustre: lnet: lnet: checkpatch.pl fixes
oleg.drokin at intel.com
Fri May 22 17:07:42 PDT 2015
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 sjows 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?
>> CERROR is something that get's printed on the console, because it's believed
>> to be serious error (At least that's how the theory for it's usage goes).
>> It also gets rate-limited so that the console does not get overflown.
>> (but the debug buffer gets the full version).
>> (there's also LCONSOLE that always get's printed, but it does not get the
>> prefixes like line numbers and stuff).
>> CDEBUG on the other hand is a debugging message (of which ERROR messages are
>> sort of a subset (D_ERROR mask)). You can fine-tune those to be noops or
>> to go into console or to debug buffer only. Most of those are doing nothing
>> because they are off in the default debug mask, until actually enabled.
>> That CERROR usees CDEBUG underneath is just to share some common infrastructure.
>>> I think it'd be clearer as
>>> lustre_debug(ERROR, ...
>>> even if the name and use style is a little longer.
>> I wonder what is more clear about that in your opinion ve
> The fact that you have to explain this shows that it's
> at least misleading unless you completely understand the
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?
> It'd be more intelligible if this CERROR became lustre_err
> and the actual debugging uses were lustre_dbg
But the actual underlying call is hidden by the macro anyway and you never
get to see it. You see CDEBUG/CERROR and how is that different
> Perhaps it needs a better explanation somewhere not in the
> code but in some external documentation. I haven't looked.
More information about the lustre-devel