On 16.09.2022 10:32, Michal Orzel wrote: > On 16/09/2022 10:08, Julien Grall wrote: >> On 16/09/2022 08:19, Michal Orzel wrote: >>> Using dprintk results in printing additionally file name and line >>> number. This is something we do not want when printing regular >>> information unconditionally as it looks like as if there was some issue. >> I am OK if you want to switch to a printk() but I disagree with this >> argument. dprintk() is not about error, it is about anything that >> doesn't matter in release build. > > In the vast majority of cases, dprintk is used conditionally. That is why > in the debug build you cannot spot a single line of log starting with > a file name + line number. That is why I assume this behaviorto be abnormal > compared to all the other logs. > > If someone adds a printk starting with e.g. "$$$" this is also not a bad > usage of printk but would result in an inconsistent behavior. > >> >> I don't think we should just switch to printk() because dprintk() add >> the line/file. There are message we don't necessarily want to have in >> release build. So dprintk(XENLOG_INFO, ...) would be right for them. > > I think this is a matter of being consistent. > We do not have a helper to add printk only for a debug build but without > adding > filename/line number. That is why almost all the dprintks are used > conditionally.
FWIW I agree with Julien and I don't view the "conditional" aspect as relevant to decide whether to use printk() or dprintk(). Jan
