linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 2/5] ACPI: battery: Clean up printing messages

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: <CAJZ5v0hoPLKe9mVY_mJgFrcLSdutTd-UFGJS11pu8qDzemy43w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 1 Feb 2021 19:44:43 +0100
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Erik Kaneda <erik.kaneda@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/5] ACPI: battery: Clean up printing messages

On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 7:37 PM Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2021-02-01 at 19:16 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> >
> > Replace the ACPI_DEBUG_PRINT() and ACPI_EXCEPTION() instances
> > in battery.c with acpi_handle_debug() and acpi_handle_info() calls,
> > respectively, drop the _COMPONENT and ACPI_MODULE_NAME() definitions
> > that are not used any more, drop the no longer needed
> > ACPI_BATTERY_COMPONENT definition from the headers and update the
> > documentation accordingly.
> >
> > While at it, update the pr_fmt() definition and drop the unneeded
> > PREFIX sybmbol definition from battery.c.
> []
> > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/battery.c
> []
> > @@ -466,7 +460,8 @@ static int extract_package(struct acpi_b
> >  static int acpi_battery_get_status(struct acpi_battery *battery)
> >  {
> >       if (acpi_bus_get_status(battery->device)) {
> > -             ACPI_EXCEPTION((AE_INFO, AE_ERROR, "Evaluating _STA"));
> > +             acpi_handle_info(battery->device->handle,
> > +                              "_STA evaluation failed\n");
>
> I believe this changes the logging level from KERN_ERR to KERN_INFO.
>
> Perhaps this and others should instead use acpi_handle_err()

Actually, these log level changes, because the messages in question
are not very urgent.

Something doesn't work and it's kind of good to know that, but there's
not much that can be done about it.