Brad Chapman writes:
> I just got an idea: why don't we implement a userspace trace level
> system for devfsd with macro'd levels like the following:
>
> /* Basic trace levels */
> #define TRACE_LEVEL_ZERO 0 /* None */
> #define TRACE_LEVEL_SPECIFIED 1 /* Specified on the command line */
> #define TRACE_LEVEL_SIGNALS 2 /* Trapped and caught signals */
> #define TRACE_LEVEL_PROCESS_FORK 3 /* Process forks for MODLOAD and
> EXECUTE */
> #define TRACE_LEVEL_SERVICE_LOOP 4 /* devfs event service loops */
> #define TRACE_LEVEL_CONFIG 5 /* devfsd configuration */
> #define TRACE_LEVEL_KERNEL 6 /* Kernel-passed information */
>
> /* Debugging trace levels */
> #define TRACE_LEVEL_DEBUGGING 7 /* Basic debugging */
> #define TRACE_LEVEL_KERNEL_DBG 8 /* Kernel-passed information
> debugging */
> #define TRACE_LEVEL_CONFIG_DBG 9 /* Configuration debugging */
> #define TRACE_LEVEL_COMPAT_NAME_DBG 10 /* Compatiblity name debugging */
> #define TRACE_LEVEL_EXPRESSION_DBG 11 /* Regular expression debugging */
>
> Does anyone think this is a good idea?
It's not clear to me what some of these trace levels are, nor what is
to be done with them. What is it you are trying to do, anyway?
Also note that I'm not keen on adding code to the core of devfsd
unless necessary. So I'd look more favourably on an extension.
Regards,
Richard....
Permanent: rgooch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Current: rgooch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|