On Sat, 03 Jan 2026, Yury Norov <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Jan 03, 2026 at 02:57:58PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 02, 2026 at 07:50:59PM -0500, Joel Fernandes wrote: >> > On Mon, Dec 29, 2025 at 11:17:48AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> >> ... >> >> > I use trace_printk() all the time for kernel, particularly RCU development. >> > One of the key usecases I have is dumping traces on panic (with panic on >> > warn >> > and stop tracing on warn enabled). This is extremely useful since I can add >> > custom tracing and dump traces when rare conditions occur. I fixed several >> > bugs with this technique. >> > >> > I also recommend keeping it convenient to use. >> >> Okay, you know C, please share your opinion what header is the best to hold >> the >> trace_printk.h to be included. > > What if we include it on Makefile level, similarly to how W=1 works? > > make D=1 // trace_printk() is available > make D=0 // trace_printk() is not available > make // trace_printk() is not available > > Where D stands for debugging. > > D=1 may be a default setting if you prefer, but the most important is > that every compilation unit will have an access to debugging without > polluting core headers.
You do realize this means recompiling everything when adding D=1 for debugging? BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel
