[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c77b6667-25ff-70c4-2312-9262d88b1859@molgen.mpg.de>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2022 12:44:13 +0200
From: Paul Menzel <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Medad Young <medadyoung@...il.com>, rric@...nel.org,
James Morse <james.morse@....com>, tony.luck@...el.com,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Benjamin Fair <benjaminfair@...gle.com>,
Nancy Yuen <yuenn@...gle.com>,
Patrick Venture <venture@...gle.com>, KWLIU@...oton.com,
YSCHU@...oton.com, JJLIU0@...oton.com, KFTING <KFTING@...oton.com>,
Avi Fishman <avifishman70@...il.com>,
Tomer Maimon <tmaimon77@...il.com>,
Tali Perry <tali.perry1@...il.com>, ctcchien@...oton.com,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/3] EDAC: nuvoton: Add NPCM memory controller driver
Dear Borislav,
Am 14.04.22 um 12:15 schrieb Borislav Petkov:
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 10:56:43AM +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
>> No idea, why you had to ask this question, while you statement before
>> already made the point.
>
> You've told Medad one thing. I told him the complete opposite.
When? I must have missed your comment then?
> Medad as new submitter gets confused. And I don't want patch
> submitters to get confused by review.
>
> So, if you're unsure about a review feedback, don't give it pls.
Also during review errors can happen, can’t they? I apologized, and then
you for catching it.
>> Sorry I do not get your point. Would you elaborate on the debug message so
>> it’s more useful?
>
> Just think of the big picture: is my error message useful enough for
> debugging or would I have to go and add more info to it so that I can
> debug an issue?
>
> Example:
>
> There is
>
> edac_dbg(3, "InterruptStatus : 0x%x\n", intr_status);
>
> now.
>
> Now, how about this?
>
> edac_dbg(3, "dev: %s, id: %s: IRQ: %d, interrupt status: 0x%x\n",
> mci->dev_name, mci->ctl_name, irq, intr_status);
>
> Which one, do you think, is more helpful to a person trying to debug any
> potential issue with the interrupt handler and the ECCs it is supposed
> to issue?
I am all for more elaborate log messages, but have the feeling, you
think I am not? Where does the misunderstanding come from?
Kind regards,
Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists