[U-Boot-Users] [RFD] Consistent debugging output structure

[Robert Schwebel]

On Sun, Mar 23, 2003 at 03:32:24PM +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> I want the U-Boot design to keep  an  eye  on  efficiency  and  small
> memory footprint. Several debug levels may seem useful here and there
> (in  which case they are trivial to add based on the existing debug()
> macro), but in general they are just overkill.

- There are currently several places in the code (for example network
  drivers) where people have already done that and added their own
  implementations, so there seems to be a need. 

- I've not seen an argument _against_ a central, unified implementation. 

- It does not change performance or memory footprint in any way, because
  if it is switched off the debug code is not in the binary. Why do you
  think that useful unified code wich is optimized away may be overkill?
  I don't understand your argumentation. 

> Those parts where debug printout is really needed are  too  much  CPU
> and board dependend anyway.

Like network drivers...? 

> Yes, I agree, new code should not introduce it's own  "#ifdef  DEBUG"
> stuff any more, but use debug() instead - but this is IMHO one of the
> "nice to have" issues, not a really important issue.

If you see it that way NOTHING is an important issue, because u-boot
somehow works. I think that we agree that the code is a huge mess in
quite a lot of places, and having a unified debug mechanism would make
it better. 

Robert
-- 
 Dipl.-Ing. Robert Schwebel | http://www.pengutronix.de
 Pengutronix - Linux Solutions for Science and Industry
   Braunschweiger Str. 79,  31134 Hildesheim, Germany
   Handelsregister:  Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686
    Phone: +49-5121-28619-0 |  Fax: +49-5121-28619-4