On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 6:58 AM Cong Wang <xiyou.wangc...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 2:29 PM David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: > > > > From: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangc...@gmail.com> > > Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2019 14:00:09 -0800 > > > > > Just to clarify, I have been suggesting to completely remove > > > this unused macro, never suggest to just undefine it in-tree. > > > > > > There is no reason to keep it in-tree, whether defined or undefined, > > > just for downstream users. > > > > And this is where you and I fundamentally disagree. > > So you agree that I can add debugging printk's only for my own use? > I can claim that I only use them downstream and you can't force me > to carry local changes? > > If not, what is your criteria for accepting debugging printk's? Whose > can be accepted and whose can't? > > Please be specific, and ideally make it a formal doc in netdev-FAQ.txt. >
Per my personal view, I agree with you that we should remove it completely. Clean up such kind of legacy code can make the kernel more clean. Thanks Yafang
