On 04/21 14:26:55, Bill Fischofer wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:42 AM, Brian Brooks <brian.bro...@arm.com> wrote:
> 
> > On 04/21 16:11:27, Petri Savolainen wrote:
> > > This information specifies the system where ODP application
> > > is running for debugging purposes.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Petri Savolainen <petri.savolai...@linaro.org>
> > > ---
> > >  include/odp/api/spec/system_info.h | 9 +++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/include/odp/api/spec/system_info.h
> > b/include/odp/api/spec/system_info.h
> > > index 0bb4f1f1..ca4dcdc7 100644
> > > --- a/include/odp/api/spec/system_info.h
> > > +++ b/include/odp/api/spec/system_info.h
> > > @@ -45,6 +45,15 @@ uint64_t odp_sys_page_size(void);
> > >  int odp_sys_cache_line_size(void);
> > >
> > >  /**
> > > + * Print system info
> >
> > I would advise that APIs return information that can be printed by
> > the application or used otherwise. An API like this indicates that
> > the implementation itself would be sending something to stdout; that
> > can be done by the application.
> >
> 
> There is ample precedent in ODP for including APIs specifically for
> application debugging, e.g., odp_pool_print(), odp_buffer_print(),
> odp_packet_print(), so I don't see this as any different. There's a
> difference between APIs for debugging vs. logging. A debugging API would
> not be used in a production setting whereas a logging API would. For
> logging APIs we have the ability for the application to provide an
> overriding output function to allow it to consolidate or otherwise handle
> the processing of this output.

That was a recommendation along the lines of best practices rather than
questioning what the current precedent is in the code today.

> >
> > > + * Print out implementation defined information about the system. This
> > > + * information is intended for debugging purposes and may contain e.g.
> > > + * information about CPUs, memory and other HW configuration.
> > > + */
> > > +void odp_sys_info_print(void);
> > > +
> > > +/**
> > >   * @}
> > >   */
> > >
> > > --
> > > 2.11.0
> > >
> >

Reply via email to