linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] treewide: Remove dev_err() usage after platform_get

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAHp75VeiMY4snbDkM=hdqRoUQZ5bEmhjEMdinmvV1voQhWfANg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 30 Jul 2019 20:17:46 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
        Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@...hat.com>,
        Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] treewide: Remove dev_err() usage after platform_get_irq()

On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 8:16 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 6:36 PM Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org> wrote:
> > Quoting Greg Kroah-Hartman (2019-07-29 23:49:17)
> > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 10:38:44PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > > > We don't need dev_err() messages when platform_get_irq() fails now that
> > > > platform_get_irq() prints an error message itself when something goes
> > > > wrong. Let's remove these prints with a simple semantic patch.
>
> > > Can you just break this up into per-subsystem pieces and send it through
> > > those trees, and any remaining ones I can take, but at least give
> > > maintainers a chance to take it.
> >
> > Ok. Let me resend just this patch broken up into many pieces.
>
> Please, for the subsystems / drivers where I'm the (co-)maintainer,
> please split on per driver / module basis.
> I will pickup them preventively, since it will be anyway run-time
> bisectability breakage.

However, having two messages slightly better than none from user prospective...

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko