In article <[email protected]>, Izaak <[email protected]> wrote: >On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 05:17:24PM +0000, Christos Zoulas wrote: >> In article <[email protected]>, Izaak >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Having read through many files, I have found that often printf is >> > wrapped in a macro like 'DPRINTF', which is occasionally used both in >> > the driver attachment function and also elsewhere in the file. I am >> > not sure whether to [...] suppose this question holds also for >> > general macro usage, so what is the best way to deal with that? >> >> I think it is best to leave them alone too for now... >I think that specifically for autoconfiguration it would be better to >replace the debugging wrapper macro with the aprint_debug and >aprint_debug_dev for attachment and then leave the macro in place for >the rest of the file. I am only suggesting it because I have seen this >in a few places already, so I am afraid if I leave it then the clean-up >will leave behind many printf occurrences -- of course, those would be >fixed in part 2 of the project anyway though. What do you think of that >instead?
Perhaps it is best to just change the printfs to aprint_debug_dev, but leave the other printf flavors (tprintf uprintf) alone? This at least will not change behavior? christos
