Re: Dealing with debugging macros for printing as part of aprint clean-up

[christos%astron.com@localhost (Christos Zoulas)]

In article <20150213211112.GA52%norite.fritz.box@localhost>,
Izaak  <yitzhak%inbox.ru@localhost> wrote:
>On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 05:17:24PM +0000, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>> In article <20150208103806.GA1632%norite.fritz.box@localhost>, Izaak
>> <yitzhak%inbox.ru@localhost> wrote:
>> > Having read through many files, I have found that often printf is
>> > wrapped in a macro like 'DPRINTF', which is occasionally used both in
>> > the driver attachment function and also elsewhere in the file. I am
>> > not sure whether to [...] suppose this question holds also for
>> > general macro usage, so what is the best way to deal with that?
>> 
>> I think it is best to leave them alone too for now...
>I think that specifically for autoconfiguration it would be better to
>replace the debugging wrapper macro with the aprint_debug and
>aprint_debug_dev for attachment and then leave the macro in place for
>the rest of the file. I am only suggesting it because I have seen this
>in a few places already, so I am afraid if I leave it then the clean-up
>will leave behind many printf occurrences -- of course, those would be
>fixed in part 2 of the project anyway though. What do you think of that
>instead?

Perhaps it is best to just change the printfs to aprint_debug_dev, but
leave the other printf flavors (tprintf uprintf) alone? This at least
will not change behavior?

christos