[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1457984317.11972.123.camel@perches.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 12:38:37 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
rtc-linux@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc: s3c: Don't print an error on probe deferral
On Mon, 2016-03-14 at 16:31 -0300, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> On 03/14/2016 04:11 PM, Joe Perches wrote:> > On Mon, 2016-03-14 at 16:05 -0300, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> > >
> > > The clock and source clock looked up by the driver may not be available
> > > just because the clock controller driver was not probed yet so printing
> > > an error in this case is not correct and only adds confusion to users.
> > >
> > > However, knowing that a driver's probe was deferred may be useful so it
> > > can be printed as debug information.
> > []
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-s3c.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-s3c.c
> > []
> > >
> > > @@ -501,18 +501,27 @@ static int s3c_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > >
> > > info->rtc_clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "rtc");
> > > if (IS_ERR(info->rtc_clk)) {
> > > - dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to find rtc clock\n");
> > > - return PTR_ERR(info->rtc_clk);
> > > + ret = PTR_ERR(info->rtc_clk);
> > > + if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
> > > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to find rtc clock\n");
> > > + else
> > > + dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "probe deferred due rtc clock\n");
> > > + return ret;
> > > }
> > > clk_prepare_enable(info->rtc_clk);
> > >
> > > if (info->data->needs_src_clk) {
> > > info->rtc_src_clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "rtc_src");
> > > if (IS_ERR(info->rtc_src_clk)) {
> > > - dev_err(&pdev->dev,
> > > - "failed to find rtc source clock\n");
> > > + ret = PTR_ERR(info->rtc_src_clk);
> > > + if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
> > > + dev_err(&pdev->dev,
> > > + "failed to find rtc source clock\n");
> > > + else
> > > + dev_dbg(&pdev->dev,
> > > + "probe deferred due rtc source clock\n");
> > > clk_disable_unprepare(info->rtc_clk);
> > > - return PTR_ERR(info->rtc_src_clk);
> > > + return ret;
> > > }
> > > clk_prepare_enable(info->rtc_src_clk);
> > > }
> > Maybe the debug logging messages could be object->action like:
> >
> > rtc clock probe deferred
> > rtc source clock probe deferred
> >
> I found your suggested messages harder to read and more confusing. The
> action that happens is a probe function deferral and that is caused by
> a missing resource needed by the driver (clocks in this case).
>
> But your messages seems to imply that the probe deferred action happens
> to a clock, it sounds like "rtc clock disabled" and that's not correct.
OK, then please change "due" to "due to" or "for" in your messages
because they make little sense now.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists