Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/4] x86: misc printk() adjustments

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 21.12.15 at 15:41, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 21/12/15 14:34, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/io_apic.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/io_apic.c
>> @@ -2310,13 +2310,14 @@ int ioapic_guest_read(unsigned long phys
>>      return 0;
>>  }
>>  
>> -#define WARN_BOGUS_WRITE(f, a...)                                       \
>> -    dprintk(XENLOG_INFO, "\n%s: "                                        \
>> -            "apic=%d, pin=%d, irq=%d\n"                 \
>> -            "%s: new_entry=%08x\n"                      \
>> -            "%s: " f, __FUNCTION__, apic, pin, irq,        \
>> -            __FUNCTION__, *(u32 *)&rte,           \
>> -            __FUNCTION__ , ##a )
>> +#define WARN_BOGUS_WRITE(f, a...)                       \
>> +    dprintk(XENLOG_INFO, "\n"                           \
>> +            XENLOG_INFO "%s: apic=%d, pin=%d, irq=%d\n" \
>> +            XENLOG_INFO "%s: new_entry=%08x\n"          \
>> +            XENLOG_INFO "%s: " f "\n",                  \
>> +            __func__, apic, pin, irq,                   \
>> +            __func__, *(u32 *)&rte,                     \
>> +            __func__, ##a )
>>  
>>  int ioapic_guest_write(unsigned long physbase, unsigned int reg, u32 val)
>>  {
>> @@ -2388,7 +2389,7 @@ int ioapic_guest_write(unsigned long phy
>>          rte.vector = desc->arch.vector;
>>          if ( *(u32*)&rte != ret )
>>              WARN_BOGUS_WRITE("old_entry=%08x pirq=%d\n%s: "
>> -                             "Attempt to modify IO-APIC pin for in-use 
>> IRQ!\n",
>> +                             "Attempt to modify IO-APIC pin for in-use 
>> IRQ!",
>>                               ret, pirq, __FUNCTION__);
> 
> Given that this is the sole user of WARN_BOGUS_WRITE(), I would
> recommend folding it all together in a simple dprintk(), and remove some
> of the redundant information, and fixing the resulting message to take
> up fewer lines.

If you feel strongly about this I could certainly do so, but I did
consider that option and decided against it to retain the option
of using the macro (again?) in a second place.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel