From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25EDC41BBF; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 19:35:46 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD15F42B8C; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 19:35:45 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 643294067B for ; Fri, 3 Feb 2023 19:35:44 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1675449343; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=rJIeWtHZL+e/CviK7h3DJ3WKGD1xst21/NNres2bzmI=; b=boD0jlHORIADS/Rm1ZROExV4VzyFJFl4AviljKPxTTTQtcd3bEME6m59+GdfiDwHPE4PDH Zqy82UqTCNcz2YqK3aJn97FELawKaMsELlQqOz7TmilQQAhdxWTUz0TGQa4QM1fUql1LSC fOKwTzS09b+ssX608YiR23avRTS43A0= Received: from mail-pj1-f70.google.com (mail-pj1-f70.google.com [209.85.216.70]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id us-mta-75-Cc_wTskNN1G1uQKudo7ydg-1; Fri, 03 Feb 2023 13:35:42 -0500 X-MC-Unique: Cc_wTskNN1G1uQKudo7ydg-1 Received: by mail-pj1-f70.google.com with SMTP id bb5-20020a17090b008500b0022c04c51749so2805498pjb.0 for ; Fri, 03 Feb 2023 10:35:42 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=rJIeWtHZL+e/CviK7h3DJ3WKGD1xst21/NNres2bzmI=; b=bLG+7Gp53c80sjwoJXqYLARkBqaAdxGzFLLosKyGhG/uhC4m/pyGcK+sch1kA2AQ88 K+esrRzaI6mKoQ54MvwwbFDW+/moueO3BHDN6YGp9nqdA77cwMHF31hkc7ydAbRzidbc 3A0t+jhdOpTl0qQGMGtsrOPa7mPhqMlCGEK7awQ6zLD8vIauDMOGAIoGrswUnBnMeVK4 g55JdSy9Z9TPUqMI5nbcgEkkniK/HlY6T2yWBYaevEmO9hZbachCaDgb+7lScCqW1baY HH4Lq9grdj161xW926GUd6ZSppU7L47RuvpO2jHGMjhiWuf9e6xKMJN7vq8se/81dH77 q05Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKWbO6KmvH4kAyEPM9nNVWEZFzwaQzs2gv5cPHrmpQKpIYa2IIhj Il+5ymqMcyISZiJzM/NC/e2ZbiWizC9sTuBDdp/hxB78RPkhe8ZuDk80p18Z0+WC+/lj2JOgfF8 KxgncNVbTJklDCl42HuA= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:1a8d:b0:590:6fcc:be6f with SMTP id e13-20020a056a001a8d00b005906fccbe6fmr2582998pfv.49.1675449341622; Fri, 03 Feb 2023 10:35:41 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set8OyDMGNujksvvYGaqpSqi09XTjJYNMU0XOU9eCu6cjopttLqxNaIhhurCrPCaBNnUuluMdTa1VEfrYzBabcYs= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:1a8d:b0:590:6fcc:be6f with SMTP id e13-20020a056a001a8d00b005906fccbe6fmr2582981pfv.49.1675449341175; Fri, 03 Feb 2023 10:35:41 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <3217725.44csPzL39Z@thomas> <5799302.MhkbZ0Pkbq@thomas> In-Reply-To: <5799302.MhkbZ0Pkbq@thomas> From: David Marchand Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2023 19:35:29 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: no printf in drivers code To: Thomas Monjalon Cc: Nicolas Chautru , "hemant.agrawal@nxp.com" , Sachin Saxena , Gagandeep Singh , Sunil Uttarwar , Bruce Richardson , Conor Walsh , Chaoyong He , Niklas Soderlund , Rasesh Mody , Devendra Singh Rawat , Jiawen Wu , Jian Wang , Rosen Xu , Tianfei zhang , Honnappa Nagarahalli , "dev@dpdk.org" , Ferruh Yigit , Andrew Rybchenko X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 5:40 PM Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 03/02/2023 17:18, Honnappa Nagarahalli: > > From: Thomas Monjalon > > > > > > We have too many drivers using printf() instead of rte_log(). > > > Please propose a plan to replace or remove the calls to printf(). > > > If no plan, I could propose one but you may not like it :) > > > > Does it make sense to add scripts to CI to capture this issue? > > In general, we do not want printfs in DPDK code (other than tests, sample apps?) > > It's difficult to automate because printfs are acceptable > in dump functions, selftest, and testpmd code hosted in drivers directories. We can identify which parts need those, create dedicated helpers that do call printf (but are excluded from the check), and and then the printf exclusion is applied to the whole tree. -- David Marchand