On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 10:59:58AM -0500, Thomas Falcon wrote: > > On 7/15/20 8:29 PM, David Miller wrote: > > From: Jakub Kicinski <k...@kernel.org> > > Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 17:06:32 -0700 > > > > > On Wed, 15 Jul 2020 18:51:55 -0500 Thomas Falcon wrote: > > > > free_netdev(netdev); > > > > dev_set_drvdata(&dev->dev, NULL); > > > > + netdev_info(netdev, "VNIC client device has been successfully > > > > removed.\n"); > > > A step too far, perhaps. > > > > > > In general this patch looks a little questionable IMHO, this amount of > > > logging output is not commonly seen in drivers. All the the info > > > messages are just static text, not even carrying any extra information. > > > In an era of ftrace, and bpftrace, do we really need this? > > Agreed, this is too much. This is debugging, and thus suitable for tracing > > facilities, at best. > > Thanks for your feedback. I see now that I was overly aggressive with this > patch to be sure, but it would help with narrowing down problems at a first > glance, should they arise. The driver in its current state logs very little > of what is it doing without the use of additional debugging or tracing > facilities. Would it be worth it to pursue a less aggressive version or > would that be dead on arrival? What are acceptable driver operations to log > at this level?
Also would it be advisable to add the messages as pr_dbg to be enabled on demand? Thanks Michal
