linuxconsole-dev

[PATCH] Debug stuff

[Bj|rn A. <d3a...@dt...>]

Hi!

Here's a new version of the debug printing patch. I've indented it to
match the existing code betteri, mostly. The patch also adds a little
details to error messages, and fixes one that was plain wrong.

It's against Johann's input-only patch to 2.4.17, but it should patch
cleanly against the 2.5 tree, I think.

/August.
-- 
Wrong on most accounts.  const Foo *foo; and Foo const *foo; mean the same: foo
being a pointer to const Foo.  const Foo const *foo; would mean the same but is
illegal (double const).  You are confusing this with Foo * const foo; and const
Foo * const foo; respectively. -David Kastrup, comp.os.linux.development.system

Re: [PATCH] Debug stuff

[Vojtech P. <vo...@su...>]

On Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 04:58:04AM +0100, Bj|rn Augustsson wrote:

> Hi!
> 
> Here's a new version of the debug printing patch. I've indented it to
> match the existing code betteri, mostly. The patch also adds a little
> details to error messages, and fixes one that was plain wrong.
> 
> It's against Johann's input-only patch to 2.4.17, but it should patch
> cleanly against the 2.5 tree, I think.

Thanks for the patch, with minor offsets it patched cleanly into a
Dave Jones's 2.5.2-ac4-pre kernel. One minor bug in your patch - you
made hid-core use dump_field, and didn't define it in case DEBUG wasn't
set.

-- 
Vojtech Pavlik
SuSE Labs

Re: [PATCH] Debug stuff

[Bj|rn A. <d3a...@dt...>]

Quoting Vojtech Pavlik <vo...@su...>:
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 04:58:04AM +0100, Bj|rn Augustsson wrote:
> 
> > Hi!
> > 
> > Here's a new version of the debug printing patch. I've indented it to
> > match the existing code betteri, mostly. The patch also adds a little
> > details to error messages, and fixes one that was plain wrong.
> > 
> > It's against Johann's input-only patch to 2.4.17, but it should patch
> > cleanly against the 2.5 tree, I think.
> 
> Thanks for the patch, with minor offsets it patched cleanly into a
> Dave Jones's 2.5.2-ac4-pre kernel. One minor bug in your patch - you
> made hid-core use dump_field, and didn't define it in case DEBUG wasn't
> set.

Ah, so I did.

Hmm. One fix is to add dump_field to this section in hid.h:

#ifdef DEBUG
#include "hid-debug.h"
#else
#define hid_dump_input(a,b)     do { } while (0)
#define hid_dump_device(c)      do { } while (0)
#endif

But better (IHMO) is for hid.h to include hid_debug.h unconditionally
and have it define these functions as "do { } while (0)" or the real
thing depending on DEBUG. That moves some cruft from hid.h to the 
debug file.

Any problems with that? 

/August.
-- 
Wrong on most accounts.  const Foo *foo; and Foo const *foo; mean the same: foo
being a pointer to const Foo.  const Foo const *foo; would mean the same but is
illegal (double const).  You are confusing this with Foo * const foo; and const
Foo * const foo; respectively. -David Kastrup, comp.os.linux.development.system

Re: [PATCH] Debug stuff

[Vojtech P. <vo...@su...>]

On Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 02:18:40PM +0100, Bj|rn Augustsson wrote:
> Quoting Vojtech Pavlik <vo...@su...>:
> > On Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 04:58:04AM +0100, Bj|rn Augustsson wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi!
> > > 
> > > Here's a new version of the debug printing patch. I've indented it to
> > > match the existing code betteri, mostly. The patch also adds a little
> > > details to error messages, and fixes one that was plain wrong.
> > > 
> > > It's against Johann's input-only patch to 2.4.17, but it should patch
> > > cleanly against the 2.5 tree, I think.
> > 
> > Thanks for the patch, with minor offsets it patched cleanly into a
> > Dave Jones's 2.5.2-ac4-pre kernel. One minor bug in your patch - you
> > made hid-core use dump_field, and didn't define it in case DEBUG wasn't
> > set.
> 
> Ah, so I did.
> 
> Hmm. One fix is to add dump_field to this section in hid.h:
> 
> #ifdef DEBUG
> #include "hid-debug.h"
> #else
> #define hid_dump_input(a,b)     do { } while (0)
> #define hid_dump_device(c)      do { } while (0)
> #endif

Yes, that's what I did.

> But better (IHMO) is for hid.h to include hid_debug.h unconditionally
> and have it define these functions as "do { } while (0)" or the real
> thing depending on DEBUG. That moves some cruft from hid.h to the 
> debug file.
> 
> Any problems with that? 

I'm not sure which is less ugly - #defining the name of an existing
function to override it or having the #ifdef in hid.h which noone else
than the hid driver is supposed to include anyway.

-- 
Vojtech Pavlik
SuSE Labs