Hello, I recently ran "scripts/checkpatch.pl" after adding the simplest form of "hello world" module to the source tree. I used the old "printk"s in this module and got this warning message:
WARNING: Prefer netdev_dbg(netdev, ... then dev_dbg(dev, ... then pr_debug(... to printk(KERN_DEBUG ... It has come to my understanding that the dynamic debugging interface offered by pr_debug and dev_dbg have obvious advantages to printk and therefore they are preferred to printk. Even amongst dev_dbg and pr_debug, we prefer dev_dbg if we have a struct device to standardize device information output along with our debug message. It offers escape from the "edit/rebuild/reboot cycle" and also allows to maintain a neat log through dynamic_debug/control interface. I was not clear as to why netdev_dbg would be preferred to dev_dbg and was given this asnwer on stackoverflow: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/22077540/order-of-preference-printk-vs-dev-dbg-vs-netdev-dbg Particularly, in regards to this part: "netdev_dbg it is not the absolutly prefered print style. It is prefered if you are working with a netdevice." If this is the case, then I think the WARNING message should be modified to mention that [subsystem]_dbg is preferred over dev_dbg. In case this is correct and I am not missing something, I would like to propose a patch to modify this script to give appropriate error message. But in case I am wrong about this I would like comments/suggestions/explanations before starting anything. Thanks Yogesh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
