qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 1/3] virtio-bus : Introduce VirtioBus.


From: Andreas Färber
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 1/3] virtio-bus : Introduce VirtioBus.
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 15:13:01 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121025 Thunderbird/16.0.2

Am 21.11.2012 15:05, schrieb KONRAD Frédéric:
> On 21/11/2012 14:04, Andreas Färber wrote:
>> Am 16.11.2012 16:35, schrieb address@hidden:
>>> +#define DEBUG_VIRTIO_BUS
>>> +
>>> +#ifdef DEBUG_VIRTIO_BUS
>>> +
>>> +#define DPRINTF(fmt, ...) \
>>> +do { printf("virtio_bus: " fmt , ## __VA_ARGS__); } while (0)
>>> +#else
>>> +#define DPRINTF(fmt, ...) do {} while (0)
>>> +#endif
>> We recently had a discussion about bitrotting DPRINTF() statements where
>> I suggested to use if (0) instead of a no-op macro like this that
>> doesn't reference fmt and the varargs.
> I don't understand what you suggested, can you point me to an example ?

I don't have a link at hand, maybe Evgeny does. It was along the lines of:

#define DEBUG_VIRTIO_BUS 0

#define DPRINTF(fmt, ...) if (DEBUG_VIRTIO_BUS) { \
        printf("virtio_bus: " fmt , ## __VA_ARGS__); \
    }

The officially preferred alternative is to use tracepoints. ;)

Cheers,
Andreas

-- 
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]