[alsa-devel] Improving or replacing snd_printk()
tiwai at suse.de
Fri May 31 09:58:45 CEST 2013
At Fri, 31 May 2013 00:38:01 -0700,
Joe Perches wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 09:35 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > At Fri, 31 May 2013 00:30:09 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 09:23 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > > At Fri, 31 May 2013 00:06:07 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 08:37 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > > > > I think most of snd_printd() and snd_printdd() can be kept as is.
> > > > > > These are just debug messages, after all.
> > > > > Some of those are emitted at levels other than KERN_DEBUG.
> > > > > I think that odd.
> > > > Yeah, they aren't good, but it's a different topic.
> > >
> > > Not really, I think it's systemic and fallout from
> > > accretive implementation rather than design.
> > Maybe.
> > But you shouldn't mix up with the fix for the missing verbosity and
> > the fix for wrong KERN_ prefix, at least, in the patch level. They
> > need to be fixed individually.
> I think that's best too.
> I don't see the complexity/hell in adding functions
> for specific types of struct * to reduce the complexity
> of the code though. Centralizing those indirections
> into functions also generally reduces overall code size.
I don't mind to add the struct pointer to new snd_*() -- if we really
introduce them. The bigger question is whether we really need to
introduce such, and if yes, what variants. And for that, I don't
think we need to add many functions. Maybe snd_card_<level>() would
be good. But others don't seem to make sense to me (remember that I
suggest dropping CONFIG_SND_VERBOSE_PRINTK).
More information about the Alsa-devel