Kalle Valo writes:
> Jes Sorensen writes:
>
>> Joe Perches writes:
>>> I think it'd be nicer to use dev_dbg for all these cases
>>> and as well use some new macro that includes the test
>>>
>>> Something like:
>>>
>>> #define
Larry Finger writes:
> On 09/17/2016 03:59 PM, Jes Sorensen wrote:
>> Larry Finger writes:
>>> As soon as debugging is turned on, the logs are filled with messages
>>> reporting the interrupt status. As this quantity is usually zero, this
>>>
Jes Sorensen writes:
> Joe Perches writes:
>> On Sat, 2016-09-17 at 12:09 -0500, Larry Finger wrote:
>>> As soon as debugging is turned on, the logs are filled with messages
>>> reporting the interrupt status. As this quantity is usually zero, this
>>>
On 09/17/2016 03:59 PM, Jes Sorensen wrote:
Larry Finger writes:
As soon as debugging is turned on, the logs are filled with messages
reporting the interrupt status. As this quantity is usually zero, this
output is not needed. In fact, there will be a report if the
Larry Finger writes:
> As soon as debugging is turned on, the logs are filled with messages
> reporting the interrupt status. As this quantity is usually zero, this
> output is not needed. In fact, there will be a report if the status is
> not zero, thus the debug line
Joe Perches writes:
> On Sat, 2016-09-17 at 12:09 -0500, Larry Finger wrote:
>> As soon as debugging is turned on, the logs are filled with messages
>> reporting the interrupt status. As this quantity is usually zero, this
>> output is not needed. In fact, there will be a report
On Sat, 2016-09-17 at 12:09 -0500, Larry Finger wrote:
> As soon as debugging is turned on, the logs are filled with messages
> reporting the interrupt status. As this quantity is usually zero, this
> output is not needed. In fact, there will be a report if the status is
> not zero, thus the debug