On Tue, Apr 07, 2026 at 09:36:56AM -0500, Weijun Pan wrote: > The ifpga rawdev driver uses printf() directly for runtime messages. > DPDK drivers should use the logging framework instead of printing > to standard output. > > Replace the remaining direct printf() calls in ifpga_rawdev.c with > the driver logging macros. > > Resend as a standalone patch after the previous submission was > accidentally sent together with an unrelated patch.
JFYI: details about resends or new versions are better put as a notes under the cutline "---", so they get stripped automatically by git when patch is applied. > > Signed-off-by: Weijun Pan <[email protected]> > --- Acked-by: Bruce Richardson <[email protected]> Agree that these should be properly logged. Only question is the log level for each. One question inline below about that. > drivers/raw/ifpga/ifpga_rawdev.c | 6 +++--- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/raw/ifpga/ifpga_rawdev.c > b/drivers/raw/ifpga/ifpga_rawdev.c > index 5b9b596435..e004e002b7 100644 > --- a/drivers/raw/ifpga/ifpga_rawdev.c > +++ b/drivers/raw/ifpga/ifpga_rawdev.c > @@ -434,7 +434,7 @@ static int set_surprise_link_check_aer( > uint32_t aer_new0, aer_new1; > > if (!ifpga_rdev || !ifpga_rdev->rawdev) { > - printf("\n device does not exist\n"); > + IFPGA_RAWDEV_PMD_ERR("device does not exist"); > return -EFAULT; > } > > @@ -491,7 +491,7 @@ static int set_surprise_link_check_aer( > if (fd != -1) > close(fd); > > - printf(">>>>>>Set AER %x,%x %x,%x\n", > + IFPGA_RAWDEV_PMD_INFO(">>>>>>Set AER %x,%x %x,%x", > ifpga_rdev->aer_old[0], ifpga_rdev->aer_old[1], > aer_new0, aer_new1); > I wonder if this needs to be an info message. Might it be better as a debug level one? > @@ -527,7 +527,7 @@ ifpga_rawdev_gsd_handle(__rte_unused void *param) > } > > if (gsd_enable) > - printf(">>>>>>Pls Shutdown APP\n"); > + IFPGA_RAWDEV_PMD_WARN(">>>>>>Pls Shutdown APP"); > > rte_delay_us(100 * MS); > } > -- > 2.34.1 >
