On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 4:53 PM Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@amd.com> wrote: > > On 3/9/2023 4:21 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 09:16:33 +0100 > > David Marchand <david.march...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > >> + RTE_ETHDEV_LOG(ERR, "Ethdev port_id=%u requested Rx offloads > >> '%s' in %s(). " > >> + "Device supports '%s' Rx offloads but does not > >> support '%s'.\n", > >> + port_id, requested != NULL ? requested : "N/A", > >> __func__, > >> + available != NULL ? available : "N/A", > >> + unavailable != NULL ? unavailable : "N/A"); > >> + free(requested); > > > > Please shorten message and make sure it does not cross line boundaries. > > Best to allow users to do simple search for message. > > Agree that using offload names are more user friendly. > > To keep the log more reasonable length, what would you think to split > into two, one in ERR level other is in info/debug: > ERR, "Ethdev port_id=%u does not support '%s'.\n", unavailable > DEBUG, "Ethdev port_id=%u requested Rx offloads '%s', device supports > '%s'.\n", requested, available > > And I think we can drop __func__, we don't use in many other logs anyway.
Splitting seems the simpler and won't require an application involvement. I would even split the debug message in two (after all, if we have two logs, why not three :-)). I'll also revisit the patch wrt allocations. > > > > Other option can be to provide APIs to print all offloads (similar to > 'rte_eth_dev_tx_offload_name()'), so application does its own logging, > and ethdev just prints 'unavailable' part of the log. > -- David Marchand
