From owner-freebsd-wireless@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Aug  3 21:12:42 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-wireless@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0D1CEC1;
 Sat,  3 Aug 2013 21:12:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cg@cgross.info)
Received: from alpha.kreiz-it.fr (alpha.kreiz-it.fr [178.32.219.166])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83CB32E22;
 Sat,  3 Aug 2013 21:12:42 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from DirTech (lnr56-1-82-246-51-185.fbx.proxad.net [82.246.51.185])
 by alpha.kreiz-it.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C0BAA61C;
 Sat,  3 Aug 2013 23:12:40 +0200 (CEST)
From: "Cedric GROSS" <cg@cgross.info>
To: "'Adrian Chadd'" <adrian@freebsd.org>
References: <51f3f0ce.055a420a.2e1e.fffff220SMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@mx.google.com>	<CAJ-VmokCVB5kNY44hJLbAfOb1DMSHmJAG3QTUZYhmPL1gHwMwA@mail.gmail.com>	<002d01ce8c46$a13b23d0$e3b16b70$@info>	<CAJ-Vmon4hMbgFKaWva3-HhcJv=eUXKwX7s0uPcD9Nu9g86QEbA@mail.gmail.com>	<002701ce8e03$c033f640$409be2c0$@info>	<CAJ-Vmo=yZXdKuXZ85bXs-uG2tAmcZFMAgFXCswnVBk2PUmaXfQ@mail.gmail.com>	<002401ce8f5f$fc5ad780$f5108680$@info>	<CAJ-VmoniUozz48U0MHhF4sAsrJt6sd06Q9UESRFG9kOXSB2ObQ@mail.gmail.com>	<001001ce903b$e77a5f70$b66f1e50$@info>	<CAJ-VmonRBrVCZu9dshSEiVxH9=0LhHdxr5tew4tsN1A5R9f0Sw@mail.gmail.com>	<001e01ce907e$f1daf220$d590d660$@info>	<CAJ-VmokSjs1gWJa0h6evb71Nf0=jNSLBMCW00EtAjinOmT69ig@mail.gmail.com>	<003201ce9081$b401a270$1c04e750$@info>
 <CAJ-Vmo=YBzkcySqJxWhn0WWtbSrCsT41GO+BwYOvDHu2_A7KBQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJ-Vmo=YBzkcySqJxWhn0WWtbSrCsT41GO+BwYOvDHu2_A7KBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [IWN] Reviw split 2
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2013 23:12:35 +0200
Message-ID: <003501ce908e$2e9d2750$8bd775f0$@info>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: Ac6QgpwiK4H6n3H/QhKxoH70IF3XAgAC3+RQ
Content-Language: fr
Cc: freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussions of 802.11 stack,
 tools device driver development." <freebsd-wireless.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-wireless>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-wireless-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-wireless>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-wireless-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-wireless>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-wireless-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2013 21:12:42 -0000

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De=A0: adrian.chadd@gmail.com [mailto:adrian.chadd@gmail.com] De la =
part
> de Adrian Chadd
> Envoy=E9=A0: samedi 3 ao=FBt 2013 21:50
> =C0=A0: Cedric GROSS
> Cc=A0: freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org
> Objet=A0: Re: [IWN] Reviw split 2
>=20
> On 3 August 2013 12:43, Cedric GROSS <cg@cgross.info> wrote:
>=20
> >> Ok, why'd you change the debug print macro to check if the debug
> >> flags match the check, rather than if the debug flags are set in =
the
> check?
> >>
> >> ie
> >>
> >> (f) & (v)
> >>
> >> versus
> >> ( (f) & (v) =3D=3D (v) )
> >>
> >> ?
> >
> > It's for reducing tracing verbosity and just do trace when associate
> > with another IWN_DEBUG_* So if you wish to debug only XMIT, trace
> also
> > print only associate with that level (ie IWN_DEBUG_TRACE |
> > IWN_DEBUG_XMIT)
>=20
> Ok. I like the general idea, but I think overloading that for the
> general case is against POLA.
>=20
> Eg, ath(4), ath_hal(4), net80211(4) all have the mask idea, rather =
than
> the exact match idea. So there are cases where multiple bits are set =
in
> a debug mask (eg some INPUT and 11N flags in net80211) since they're
> relevant for both.
>=20
> So I'd like to come up with an alternative way to do trace debugging
> like you ask.
>=20
> Maybe what we should do is add a DPRINTF_TRACE() macro for things that
> are specifically _trace_ events, then have a separate trace bitmap for
> trace debugging.

Ok, I'll do that.

>=20
>=20
>=20
> -adrian