Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.19;
Date:   Mon, 7 Feb 2022 13:06:01 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
To:     Paulo Miguel Almeida <paulo.miguel.almeida.rodenas@gmail.com>
Cc:     gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, realwakka@gmail.com,
        linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: pi433: remove need to recompile code to debug
 fifo content
Message-ID: <20220207100601.GF1951@kadam>
References: <YgCj2P59AbFFmnbA@mail.google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YgCj2P59AbFFmnbA@mail.google.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount: 1
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0: =?us-ascii?Q?/aGNq9xZNqoXY1uQDxAMg0mEGHoI133Jh2CZkHuXbUWpvrb2pxFu8vE+ddGD?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?zMn8H4N+IJJkLN2FRov4I9UtqkRUxuvMPxzMJ/YWsLAMVMnggtJXEA9pDTuK?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?6EaGDxv3a6wOSJg4TWYez8SbWYhxikxB6ZWwW07IpLYj5rviqxVtKDuVVWhO?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?6aB5oicpUEeeGCFBQqVpUYm8PblxJKrkm8cGmng0yNGtth5/t3ABbSStW8zX?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?fldh80LQOpBm9k1T8BJbKlB/U2yB8fvxbhfNT+VJ53ycHQDkIU4kcvpQO6+x?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?wUPq3v5ScOW23o8lIbqMU6OykrKqHvczEbLOyGuFMGNvVdnIbL2ejH33Bwek?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?5HXRDgtrhGL5LxSBnrJCC/KImkTMGLfhOlb3KosKsNZPYqgOsu4lgfIaTcKN?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?zpYSllH1P/AGR8ah/A6jokYhZcCAyi2Hm/cV/Xp0cIrRQie/LK3Xt7b8Jbxb?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?28ZRZf1YxKB4lv9563fHHc1obT1qSxZNlCde+hsrvoBJPc1rp24uozlS+8tW?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?5qRxipeBGLxZwFEYpUeGGgzxlBoolbhpu18Zwk9iOQtPku199UnR00PL3G8I?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?BBwSZvJVw54zbXCPsRjvioqeBSv76KIr5inKXeZXPqd2Ptck5muG7+VjeAR7?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?U32kpy+F9hzGln36Cdr4DTTpriLsEk7apRImygFVmlAV0QAKVjVacWSl/X9m?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?cFw+Ejeff+keXv2K/1eZGDeOq6jmgvtYrd9WsAMTfT8oaAvqVGE0cYbsOtYU?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?WjQmVwbpTl2hs5dnMiHzq6Ex0rdEuy4QwaLb3aYVKJ175cJaef0tJcLKT4jt?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?IjwQvQb0YFntlTjzhWnZJZSeWF7DEGhNbWcqa5y+JVSjgzXjmjq3Lb9+82tU?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?pjh9wKAdflcs01WPT/58IK/qJeCXUqU9MFI392XlogYJ86ftDNZjNO7srAvH?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?53m/X24ISLSSpQkJ9xupRY4vt6OEIK3hgYYS+IjTd7+Exv0ugc8wc6W2Lu1v?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?6NObcVKXKsqNe64K9+eI8PBogRkvkQ0wjGVfpcFFWhdvlrxiX87cXq8ujvRe?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?VUJQEpMDQcTi5c/qQ4VK6y8BdZHOpcuLzqyLFe5jnqcpN2CdVWHpna1ANr7r?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?OY1qGdZ/RzaIhnpOhIe3kIXB8ggZGR4j5FGNMtI2Flgcg5FSH/5EnkqIeyhI?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?TICOEuNdHbuPtaomQRKs//IGso3vcCwFrxSAe00dqYTuc4uuFwZ7Y27DB3RI?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?1I8HxYnmqBAisJtqeUlegdW6P+JRJIQspWlHhg3N4ifzWD3klEVlQWB8jsp6?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?9MWfpB5Z5zts6jgjhhwHhT3sCMoQ8DaaAsfXKa4Dv0rR3qxDa8xu0VAX8rRM?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?gY5mFU0ltG8rDs37u2QreQ7XDfnqJLk+viW0OuIpsGwdEdXY4YNan7RKL1x3?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?flYoe7EcwnKpODpdvyi0LgZcJL5FMxfVG5Hc6nzq3OyrPUab1dfP/IlVzc2s?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?8Z8cGBy3Uv5SuW2CdiRPJKGSDEiwPPzFh4YMnhDzSI6rsFuyJjRBrqMSII7g?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?oUxpdtAcVrWFrEWirOLRKSkMa0I+T/ZJfut7G83MlneUKAqZ4LpTKWhL7nME?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?PkNf5CW/ovq6kxh4bCsA+iz437rcngaKUw1Qbv0AeoDMZFAyxA458PnzmxW5?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?DTG8+g=3D=3D?=
X-OriginatorOrg: oracle.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 015d375c-0d09-4ab1-4aec-08d9ea217bd1
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: MWHPR1001MB2365.namprd10.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Feb 2022 10:06:18.7082
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 4e2c6054-71cb-48f1-bd6c-3a9705aca71b
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: VLrwlgMTpZg1kdDoKoS9JW6gVIYnj7uRpEG7uHLgeqm1UwmMtfFzdeNE1P6uOR7CO0BaVNtO8DPF+EgVAqSWobR/2AHMrLVNpf/a67BRJUU=
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR10MB4317
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6300 definitions=10250 signatures=673430
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxlogscore=999 mlxscore=0 bulkscore=0
 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 spamscore=0
 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2201110000
 definitions=main-2202070066
X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: bmYSVUWkhq3zUGRFrBzfheYxfaz1V8oT
X-Proofpoint-GUID: bmYSVUWkhq3zUGRFrBzfheYxfaz1V8oT
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,
	MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RDNS_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on
	lindbergh.monkeyblade.net
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Feb 07, 2022 at 05:45:12PM +1300, Paulo Miguel Almeida wrote:
> Debugging content present in the FIFO register is tricky as when we read
> the FIFO register that changes the content of fifo struct which reduces
> number of possible ways of debugging it. Rf69 uC has the possibility of
> triggering certain IRQs depending on how many items are in the FIFO
> queue, so being able to know what's in there is an important way to
> troubleshoot certain problems.
> 
> This patch removes the requirement of having to compile pi433 driver
> with DEBUG_FIFO_ACCESS set and let that be driven by printk verbositity
> level and/or dynamic debug config instead.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Paulo Miguel Almeida <paulo.miguel.almeida.rodenas@gmail.com>
> ---
> Meta-comments:
> 
> #1
> In my mind, I didn't like the idea of having to change the code and then 
> echo "module pi433 +p" > <debugfs>/dynamic_debug/control to only then
> be able to read stuff being sent/retrieved from fifo. It felt somewhat
> redundant at a certain level. On the other hand, I understand that
> removing the conditional compilation will force a for-loop to iterate
> for no real reason most of the time (max 66 iterations)... so I made a 
> trade-off and in case anyone disagrees with that, just let me know and I
> will be happy to change to a different approach.
> 

This is fine.  It's useful information to you.  It's makes the code
nicer by removing ifdefs.  It's not going to show up in benchmarking.

> #2
> In the past, it's been pointed out to me during code review that I tend
> to add code comments which could be omitted. In this case, the for-loop
> seemed a bit odd without explaining why it's in there. Let me know if
> you think I should keep/remove it.

Remove.  Everyone knows what dev_dbg() does and the "read from fifo"
vs "written from[sic] fifo" is built into the function name.

>  int rf69_read_fifo(struct spi_device *spi, u8 *buffer, unsigned int size)
>  {
> -#ifdef DEBUG_FIFO_ACCESS
>  	int i;
> -#endif
>  	struct spi_transfer transfer;
>  	u8 local_buffer[FIFO_SIZE + 1];

You did not introduce this but we are potentially printing out
uninitialized data if spi_sync_transfer() fails.  Please initialize this
with:

	u8 local_buffer[FIFO_SIZE + 1] = {};

Do that in a separate patch, though.

>  	int retval;
> @@ -851,10 +844,9 @@ int rf69_read_fifo(struct spi_device *spi, u8 *buffer, unsigned int size)
>  
>  	retval = spi_sync_transfer(spi, &transfer, 1);
>  
> -#ifdef DEBUG_FIFO_ACCESS
> +	/* print content read from fifo for debugging purposes */
>  	for (i = 0; i < size; i++)
>  		dev_dbg(&spi->dev, "%d - 0x%x\n", i, local_buffer[i + 1]);
> -#endif
>  
>  	memcpy(buffer, &local_buffer[1], size);
>  

regards,
dan carpenter