Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751413AbdFHFZI (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Jun 2017 01:25:08 -0400 Received: from mail-yw0-f174.google.com ([209.85.161.174]:33519 "EHLO mail-yw0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750788AbdFHFZG (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Jun 2017 01:25:06 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1496898982.1929.7.camel@perches.com> References: <20170530094901.1807-1-hiroh@chromium.org> <1496139572.2618.19.camel@perches.com> <1496196991.2618.47.camel@perches.com> <1496203602.2618.54.camel@perches.com> <0eb529d9-a710-4305-f0e2-e2fcd5d5433a@xs4all.nl> <1496898982.1929.7.camel@perches.com> From: Tomasz Figa Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 14:24:43 +0900 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] [media] vb2: core: Lower the log level of debug outputs To: Joe Perches Cc: Hirokazu Honda , Hans Verkuil , Pawel Osciak , Kyungmin Park , Marek Szyprowski , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , linux-media@vger.kernel.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1548 Lines: 36 On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > On Thu, 2017-06-08 at 13:39 +0900, Tomasz Figa wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Hirokazu Honda wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > I completely understand bitmask method now. >> > I agree to the idea, but it is necessary to change the specification of >> > a debug parameter. >> > (We probably need to change a document about that?) >> > For example, there is maybe a user who set a debug parameter 3. >> > The user assume that logs whose levels are less than 4 are shown. >> > However, after the bitmask method is adopted, someday the logs whose >> > level is 1 or 2 are only shown, not 3 level logs are not shown. >> > This will be confusing to users. >> >> I think I have to agree with Hirokazu here. Even though it's only >> about debugging, there might be some automatic testing systems that >> actually rely on certain values here. > > I think it's a non-argument. > > If there automated systems that rely on specific levels, then > changing the levels of individual messages could also cause > those automated systems to fail. Well, that might be true for some of them indeed. I was thinking about our use case, which relies on particular numbers to get expected verbosity levels not caring about particular messages. I guess the break all or none rule is going to apply here, so we should do the bitmap conversion indeed. :) On the other hand, I think it would be still preferable to do the conversion in a separate patch. Best regards, Tomasz