[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1ad863c3-2c78-52a1-2f0f-b7a3cc3ad80d@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 21:08:12 +0100
From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: rjw@...ysocki.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
viresh.kumar@...aro.org, Chris Redpath <chris.redpath@...aro.org>,
Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@...aro.org>,
Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@...aro.org>,
Nicolas Dechesne <nicolas.dechesne@...aro.org>,
Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
Li Yang <leoyang.li@....com>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 2/2] base/drivers/arch_topology: Default dmips-mhz if
they are not set in DT
Hi Greg,
thanks for the review.
On 26/11/2018 16:06, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 01:20:43PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> --- a/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
>> +++ b/drivers/base/arch_topology.c
>> @@ -243,9 +243,20 @@ static int __init register_cpufreq_notifier(void)
>> * until we have the necessary code to parse the cpu capacity, so
>> * skip registering cpufreq notifier.
>> */
>> - if (!acpi_disabled || !raw_capacity)
>> + if (!acpi_disabled)
>> return -EINVAL;
>>
>> + if (!raw_capacity) {
>> +
>> + pr_info("cpu_capacity: No capacity defined in DT, set default "
>> + "values to %ld\n", SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE);
>
> Why the extra blank line?
>
> And what is userspace going to do with this noise? Is this an error?
> Just normal operation? A device should never be saying anything to the
> log for normal boot functionality. When is this called?
It is not an error but a fallback path. It is called at init time when
the cpufreq notifier is called and when either the DT read failed or
nothing is specified. I agree this is noise, I will remove the trace.
> And no need for the "cpu_capacity:" right? Shouldn't the pr_info() line
> handle the prefix for you?
Ah, right I did not pay attention to the prefix and blindly copied the
line from somewhere else. I think it is better to drop this trace in any
case.
I will provide a patch setting the pr_fmt in a separate series.
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
Powered by blists - more mailing lists