[PATCH] Silence ICH preop debug message

[Carl-Daniel Hailfinger]

Since we don't have any debug level printing infrastructure yet, I
propose to kill the obnoxious debug message in ichspi.c which was added
to check for correct PREOP handling. We know the code works fine (after
getting a few reports over 100 MB long) and there's no point in keeping
it around anymore.
If there is any desire, we can reinstate it as print_spew or whatever
once the debug level infrastructure is merged, but at that point we
probably just are happy that the debug output isn't there anymore.

Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger

Index: flashrom-ich_preop_silence/ichspi.c
===================================================================
--- flashrom-ich_preop_silence/ichspi.c	(Revision 752)
+++ flashrom-ich_preop_silence/ichspi.c	(Arbeitskopie)
@@ -756,11 +756,8 @@
    		 * opcode of the next command?
    		 */
    		if ((oppos != -1) && (preoppos != -1) &&
-			    (curopcodes->opcode[oppos].atomic - 1 == preoppos)) {
-				printf_debug("opcode 0x%02x will be run as PREOP\n",
-					     cmds->writearr[0]);
+			    (curopcodes->opcode[oppos].atomic - 1 == preoppos))
    			continue;
-			}
    	}	
    		
    	ret = ich_spi_send_command(cmds->writecnt, cmds->readcnt,

[Luc Verhaegen]

On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 04:01:27AM +0200, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
> Since we don't have any debug level printing infrastructure yet, I
> propose to kill the obnoxious debug message in ichspi.c which was added
> to check for correct PREOP handling. We know the code works fine (after
> getting a few reports over 100 MB long) and there's no point in keeping
> it around anymore.
> If there is any desire, we can reinstate it as print_spew or whatever
> once the debug level infrastructure is merged, but at that point we
> probably just are happy that the debug output isn't there anymore.
>
> Signed-off-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger
> Index: flashrom-ich_preop_silence/ichspi.c
>
> --- flashrom-ich_preop_silence/ichspi.c	(Revision 752)
> +++ flashrom-ich_preop_silence/ichspi.c	(Arbeitskopie)
> @@ -756,11 +756,8 @@
>    		 * opcode of the next command?
>    		 */
>    		if ((oppos != -1) && (preoppos != -1) &&
> 	    (curopcodes->opcode[oppos].atomic - 1 == preoppos)) {
> 		printf_debug("opcode 0x%02x will be run as PREOP\n",
> 			     cmds->writearr[0]);
> 	    (curopcodes->opcode[oppos].atomic - 1 == preoppos))
> 	continue;
> 	}
> }	
> 	
> ret = ich_spi_send_command(cmds->writecnt, cmds->readcnt,

Simple enough for me to fully grasp, and yes, we should not have logs 
that noisy any more.

Acked-by: Luc Verhaegen

[Stefan Reinauer]

Hi,
> (curopcodes->opcode[oppos].atomic - 1 == preoppos)

Maybe you want to add some brackets to this one to clarify (at least for
the reader) that you're not interested in the result of

(curopcodes->opcode[oppos].atomic - (1 == preoppos))

?

Stefan

[Carl-Daniel Hailfinger]

On 22.10.2009 13:05, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
> Acked-by: Luc Verhaegen

Thanks, committed in r753 with the changes requested by Stefan.

Regards,
Carl-Daniel