Re: [PATCH 00/17] dynamic-debug cleanups refactors maintenance

From: jim . cromie

Date: Tue May 12 2026 - 06:17:39 EST


On Fri, May 8, 2026 at 8:01 PM Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 04 May 2026 14:45:06 -0600 Jim Cromie <jim.cromie@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > This series is nearly all maintenance: it refactors/splits functions,
> > The user visible change to /proc/dynamic_debug/control is s/class
> > unknown/class:_UNKNOWN_/, which is a more visible/greppable indication
> > of incomplete class definitions.
>
> Wait. We can't make userspace-visible changes?
>

- the code has been marked BROKEN for its 1st, intended user: DRM,
so there are no users affected by this change
- UNKNOWN is an error condition, an incomplete/incorrect classmap definition,
and is expected to be caught in implementation or review.
- phase 2 of the patch set has improved compile-time and modprobe-time
validation,
they would catch this coding error.
- I will drop this patch if these reasons are insufficient.


> > Coder visible change is to drop the enum ddebug_class_map_type's
> > unused vals - namely: DD_CLASS_TYPE_DISJOINT_NAMES
> > & DD_CLASS_TYPE_LEVEL_NAMES
> >
> > These allowed more symbolic named inputs:
> > echo +DRM_UT_CORE > /sys/module/drm/parameters/debug
> >
> > But theyre unused 3 years later, and probably not worth keeping.
> > With a removal commit in the log, its easy enough to restore them later.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > MAINTAINERS | 1 +
> > include/linux/dynamic_debug.h | 106 ++---
> > kernel/module/main.c | 12 +-
> > lib/dynamic_debug.c | 504 ++++++++++-----------
> > lib/test_dynamic_debug.c | 28 +-
> > tools/testing/selftests/Makefile | 1 +
> > tools/testing/selftests/dynamic_debug/Makefile | 9 +
> > tools/testing/selftests/dynamic_debug/config | 7 +
> > .../selftests/dynamic_debug/dyndbg_selftest.sh | 257 +++++++++++
> > 9 files changed, 582 insertions(+), 343 deletions(-)
>
> No Documentation/ updates?

I have 2 doc-only updates I peeled off and sent to @Linux Documentation List
Otherwise, there are no behavioral changes here to write about.
Phase 2 has API changes needed to actually fix classmaps for DRM, and
docs to go with it.

I split out phase-1 to lower the barrier to review and apply.
By your response, it seems to have helped.

wrt sashiko review, Ive made several adjustments, Im reviewing,
working the others.

Thanks
Jim