Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 30 Sep 1998 10:51:41 -0600 (MDT)
From:      "Kenneth D. Merry" <ken@plutotech.com>
To:        dag-erli@ifi.uio.no (Dag-Erling C. =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?=)
Cc:        peter@netplex.com.au, ken@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/sys/cam/scsi scsi_all.c scsi_all.h
Message-ID:  <199809301651.KAA29727@panzer.plutotech.com>
In-Reply-To: <xzppvcdhgmi.fsf@grjottunagard.ifi.uio.no> from =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag=2DErling_C=2E_Sm=F8rgrav?= at "Sep 30, 98 03:31:01 pm"

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dag-Erling C. Smørgrav wrote...
> Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au> writes:
> > Dag-Erling C. =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?= wrote:
> > > Could the bootverbose flag be made accessible through sysctl? This way
> > > you could boot verbose to get detailed probe messages, and switch it
> > > off later to avoid "unintersting" messages such as "tagged openings"
> > > etc. I'm willing to do the deed if somebody more clueful than me okays
> > > it and reviews the patch...
> > Perhaps it should be a second variable, eg: scsi_verbose..  and a 
> > corresponding sysctl  hw.scsi_verbose (or hw.scsi.verbose if there is 
> > potential for more hw.scsi.* variables).
> 
> No, I used the "tagged openings" stuff just as an example. I don't
> think it's a good idea to separate scsiverbose from bootverbose. Let's
> just call it kern.verbose...

We've already got a debug printf system in CAM anyway.  It spews too
much now to be very useful, but we're planning on making a little more
useful eventually.

Ken
-- 
Kenneth Merry
ken@plutotech.com



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199809301651.KAA29727>