The Sense of Logging in the Linux Kernel

TL;DR

This empirical study analyzes logging practices in the Linux kernel, revealing patterns, changes, and developer rationales, and offers recommendations for improving logging quality and consistency in large-scale open-source projects.

Contribution

First comprehensive empirical analysis of Linux kernel logging practices, providing insights and guidelines for enhancing logging quality and developer practices.

Findings

Logging code makes up 3.73% of Linux kernel source

Logging statements vary significantly across subsystems

Logging use decreased by 9.27% between versions v4.3 and v5.3

Abstract

Logging plays a crucial role in software engineering because it is key to perform various tasks including debugging, performance analysis, and detection of anomalies. Despite the importance of log data, the practice of logging still suffers from the lack of common guidelines and best practices. Recent studies investigated logging in C/C++ and Java open-source systems. In this paper, we complement these studies by conducting the first empirical study on logging practices in the Linux kernel, one of the most elaborate open-source development projects in the computer industry. We analyze 22 Linux releases with a focus on three main aspects: the pervasiveness of logging in Linux, the types of changes made to logging statements, and the rationale behind these changes. Our findings show that logging code accounts for 3.73% of the total source code in the Linux kernel, distributed across 72.36% of Linux files. We also found that the distribution of logging statements across Linux subsystems and their components vary significantly with no apparent reasons, suggesting that developers use different criteria when logging. In addition, we observed a slow decrease in the use of logging-reduction of 9.27% between versions v4.3 and v5.3. The majority of changes in logging code are made to fix language issues, modify log levels, and upgrade logging code to use new logging libraries, with the overall goal of improving the precision and consistency of the log output. Many recommendations are derived from our findings such as the use of static analysis tools to detect log-related issues, the adoption of common writing styles to improve the quality of log messages, the development of conventions to guide developers when selecting log levels, the establishment of review sessions to review logging code, and so on. [...]