Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Message-ID: <f9d33bcaa2eda680752205d3c3690cb6bc421730.camel@perches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] media: atomisp: Only use trace_printk if allowed
From:   Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Nicolas Boichat <drinkcat@chromium.org>
Cc:     Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
        Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>,
        devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <groeck@chromium.org>
Date:   Thu, 20 Aug 2020 19:36:19 -0700
In-Reply-To: <20200820215701.667f02b2@oasis.local.home>
References: <20200820170951.v4.1.Ia54fe801f246a0b0aee36fb1f3bfb0922a8842b0@changeid>
         <20200820170951.v4.3.I066d89f39023956c47fb0a42edf196b3950ffbf7@changeid>
         <20200820102347.15d2f610@oasis.local.home>
         <CANMq1KCoEZVj=sjxCqBhqLZKBab57+82=Rk_LN7fc3aCuNHMUw@mail.gmail.com>
         <20200820203601.4f70bf98@oasis.local.home>
         <CANMq1KAAgXG9MKMZ_D9zYFV-j0oVreA_AeSw-8FoyJgZ9eWQpg@mail.gmail.com>
         <20200820215701.667f02b2@oasis.local.home>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.36.4-0ubuntu1 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 2020-08-20 at 21:57 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Aug 2020 09:39:19 +0800
> Nicolas Boichat <drinkcat@chromium.org> wrote:
[]
> > Some other approaches/ideas:
> >  1. Filter all lkml messages that contain trace_printk. Already found
> > 1 instance, and I can easily reply to those with a semi-canned answer,
> > if I remember to check that filter regularly (not sustainable in the
> > long run...).
> 
> Added Joe Perches to the thread.
> 
> We can update checkpatch.pl to complain about a trace_printk() that it
> finds in the added code.

Why?

I don't see much value in a trace_printk checkpatch warning.
tracing is still dependent on CONFIG_TRACING otherwise
trace_printk is an if (0)

ELI5 please.