Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Improve logging around surface creation #6511

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: trunk
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Wumpf
Copy link
Member

@Wumpf Wumpf commented Nov 10, 2024

Connections

Description

  • demoted a few info messages to debug
  • request_adapter is more talkative about its decisions in debug log messages now
  • add a doc line to RequestAdapterOptions::compatible_surface, this duplicates what we already write on wgpu's request adapter, but better to request this weirdness where it's needed!

Testing
ran hello_triangle and looked at things

Checklist

  • Run cargo fmt.
  • Run taplo format.
  • Run cargo clippy. If applicable, add:
    • --target wasm32-unknown-unknown
    • --target wasm32-unknown-emscripten
  • Run cargo xtask test to run tests.
  • Add change to CHANGELOG.md. See simple instructions inside file.

@Wumpf Wumpf requested a review from a team as a code owner November 10, 2024 09:36
Copy link
Contributor

@nical nical left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me but I remember @jimblandy mentioning a while back that having some of the adapter related logging in firefox (which filters out anything below info and it's tricky to change because reasons) was important.

@teoxoy
Copy link
Member

teoxoy commented Nov 12, 2024

We should probably use the api_log! macro.

@Wumpf
Copy link
Member Author

Wumpf commented Nov 12, 2024

to be clear, I'd really prefer having those logs in debug :) (telling users to run a program with RUST_LOG=debug is a common thing I do when encountering issues rendering issues)
so api_log would mean I don't have them on trace unless I enable the feature which pushes it to info

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants