Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] dw_dmac: change {dev_}printk() to correspondingmacros

From: Andy Shevchenko
Date: Thu Oct 18 2012 - 04:15:33 EST


On Wed, 2012-10-17 at 16:53 +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 04:36:58PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-10-17 at 16:09 +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/dma/dw_dmac.c b/drivers/dma/dw_dmac.c

> > > > @@ -492,10 +491,8 @@ static void dwc_handle_error(struct dw_dma *dw, struct dw_dma_chan *dwc)
> > > > * controller flagged an error instead of scribbling over
> > > > * random memory locations.
> > > > */
> > > > - dev_printk(KERN_CRIT, chan2dev(&dwc->chan),
> > > > - "Bad descriptor submitted for DMA!\n");
> > > > - dev_printk(KERN_CRIT, chan2dev(&dwc->chan),
> > > > - " cookie: %d\n", bad_desc->txd.cookie);
> > > > + dev_crit(chan2dev(&dwc->chan), "Bad descriptor submitted for DMA!\n");
> > > > + dev_crit(chan2dev(&dwc->chan), " cookie: %d\n", bad_desc->txd.cookie);
> > >
> > > now this is critical, indeed. I would suggest using dev_WARN_ONCE() so
> > > that it's noisy enough to catch the failing user.
> > To this and upper comment, there is an explanation why it's critical. I
> > guess the WARN_ONCE is not good enough, for example if we have more than
> > one user making such noise.
>
> then use dev_WARN()
I can't see how dev_WARN could be more useful here than the dev_crit. In
current message we have channel and cookie to link back to the user.
What does WARN add meaningful?

--
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Intel Finland Oy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/