On Wed, 2014-03-19 at 10:14 +1100, Finn Thain wrote: > As for side-effects, chip register accesses would be affected if dprintk() > expanded to no_printk() when NDEBUG & flg == 0. > > E.g. NCR5380.c line 1213: > dprintk(NDEBUG_INTR, "scsi : unknown interrupt, BASR 0x%X, MR 0x%X, SR > 0x%x\n", > basr, NCR5380_read(MODE_REG), NCR5380_read(STATUS_REG)); > > I don't want to re-introduce side-effects into a dozen different NCR5380 > drivers on three different architectures when I can test only one of those > drivers. It's difficult to get good code coverage even for one driver.
Hi again Finn. If dprintk expanded directly to no_printk, then true. But using "if (0)" prevents the no_printk from occurring at all so there would be no side-effects and the format & args would still be verified by the compiler. So I believe you shouldn't worry about side-effects. cheers, Joe -- 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/
