linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] i2c: stm32: don't print an error on probe deferral

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 20 Apr 2020 17:11:52 +0200
From:   Alain Volmat <alain.volmat@...com>
To:     Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
CC:     <pierre-yves.mordret@...com>, <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
        <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <fabrice.gasnier@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: stm32: don't print an error on probe deferral

Hi Wolfram,

On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 01:01:45PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> >  	if (IS_ERR(dma->chan_tx)) {
> > -		dev_dbg(dev, "can't request DMA tx channel\n");
> >  		ret = PTR_ERR(dma->chan_tx);
> > +		if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
> > +			dev_dbg(dev, "can't request DMA tx channel\n");
> 
> dev_dbg for tx...

Intention was to not change too much the original code when introducing this
check and fixing this message level in another patch. But I guess indeed this
can be done all at once.

I am pushing a v2 fixing this in this patch and having dev_err for both tx & rx
dma requests.

> 
> >  		goto fail_al;
> >  	}
> >  
> > @@ -44,8 +45,10 @@ struct stm32_i2c_dma *stm32_i2c_dma_request(struct device *dev,
> >  	/* Request and configure I2C RX dma channel */
> >  	dma->chan_rx = dma_request_chan(dev, "rx");
> >  	if (IS_ERR(dma->chan_rx)) {
> > -		dev_err(dev, "can't request DMA rx channel\n");
> >  		ret = PTR_ERR(dma->chan_rx);
> > +		if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
> > +			dev_err(dev, "can't request DMA rx channel\n");
> 
> ... and dev_err for rx? Intentional?
>