|SUCCESS| [v3] raw/ifpga: replace printf calls with logging

[dpdklab at iol.unh.edu]

Test-Label: ai-code-review
Test-Status: SUCCESS
https://dpdk.org/patch/163005

_AI Code Review_

=== Patch Review: series.patch (via Claude) ===
Review date: 2026-04-14

git sha: (not provided - review based on series.patch)
Author: Weijun Pan <wpan36 at wisc.edu>
Subject: [PATCH v3] raw/ifpga: replace printf calls with logging

This patch replaces direct printf() calls with appropriate DPDK logging
macros in the ifpga rawdev driver.

> diff --git a/drivers/raw/ifpga/ifpga_rawdev.c b/drivers/raw/ifpga/ifpga_rawdev.c
> index 5b9b596435..c6a1b193f7 100644
> --- a/drivers/raw/ifpga/ifpga_rawdev.c
> +++ b/drivers/raw/ifpga/ifpga_rawdev.c
> @@ -434,7 +434,7 @@ static int set_surprise_link_check_aer(
>  	uint32_t aer_new0, aer_new1;
>  
>  	if (!ifpga_rdev || !ifpga_rdev->rawdev) {
> -		printf("\n device does not exist\n");
> +		IFPGA_RAWDEV_PMD_ERR("device does not exist");
>  		return -EFAULT;
>  	}
>  

[ ... ]

> @@ -491,7 +491,7 @@ static int set_surprise_link_check_aer(
>  		if (fd != -1)
>  			close(fd);
>  
> -		printf(">>>>>>Set AER %x,%x %x,%x\n",
> +		IFPGA_RAWDEV_PMD_DEBUG(">>>>>>Set AER %x,%x %x,%x",

Is this debug message prefix appropriate? The ">>>>>>Set AER" prefix
seems unconventional. Should this follow standard DPDK log message
formatting without directional markers?

[ ... ]

> @@ -527,7 +527,7 @@ ifpga_rawdev_gsd_handle(__rte_unused void *param)
>  		}
>  
>  		if (gsd_enable)
> -			printf(">>>>>>Pls Shutdown APP\n");
> +			IFPGA_RAWDEV_PMD_WARN(">>>>>>Pls Shutdown APP");

Similar to the previous comment, does this message need the ">>>>>>Pls"
prefix? Also, should "APP" be more specific about what should be shut down?
The abbreviation "Pls" appears informal for driver logging.