On 5/27/20 6:50 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 03:34:26PM -0700, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: >> On 5/27/20 1:43 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >>> @@ -155,8 +157,8 @@ int xen_pcibk_config_read(struct pci_dev *dev, int >>> offset, int size, >>> u32 value = 0, tmp_val; >>> >>> if (unlikely(verbose_request)) >>> - printk(KERN_DEBUG DRV_NAME ": %s: read %d bytes at 0x%x\n", >>> - pci_name(dev), size, offset); >>> + dev_printk(KERN_DEBUG, &dev->dev, "read %d bytes at 0x%x\n", >>> + size, offset); >> >> Maybe then dev_dbg() ? > printk(KERN_DEBUG) always produces output, so I used > dev_printk(KERN_DEBUG) to retain that behavior. > > dev_dbg() does not always produce output, since it depends on DEBUG or > CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG and the dynamic debug settings.
Oh, I didn't realize it needs either of these. > > If dev_dbg() seems like the right thing, I would probably add a > separate patch on top to convert dev_printk(KERN_DEBUG) to dev_dbg(). I think anyone who wants to see those messages ought to have at least CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG, especially since they are under verbose_request (which also should go away IMO). In fact, I wonder whether this code predates dynamic debugging, it's been there for almost 10 years. I'll leave it to you whether you want to add another patch. Reviewed-by: Boris Ostrovsky <[email protected]>
