On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 09:38:55PM +0200, Morten Brørup wrote: > > From: Bruce Richardson [mailto:bruce.richard...@intel.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, 13 June 2023 16.34 > > > > As discussed by DPDK technical board [1], out contributor guide should > > Typo: out -> our > > > include some details as to when to use logging vs tracing vs telemetry > > to provide the end user with information about the running process and > > the DPDK libraries it uses. > > > > [1] https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2023-March/265204.html > > > > Signed-off-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richard...@intel.com> > > --- > > Debug logging can be more verbose than trace in the one-off cases, so I have > a slightly different personal preference. But perhaps this is mainly relevant > in the abnormal execution paths, and thus already covered. >
Feel free to suggest alternate wordings if you have any. That particular item is hard to come up with good guidelines for - especially ones that are not pages long! :-) > Anyway, I agree with everything in this patch. > > Acked-by: Morten Brørup <m...@smartsharesystems.com> > Thanks. > You might also consider mentioning the xyz_dump(FILE *f) functions such as > rte_mempool_list_dump(FILE *f). > > I find this type of semi-structured verbose dumping very useful for > investigating the state of systems in production. Our debug CLI provides > access to these _dump() functions, including some of our own, from various > subsystems in the application. > I'll try and put some mention of that in V2. /Bruce
