[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZgzS7W83iWRII73G@sunil-laptop>
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2024 09:24:21 +0530
From: Sunil V L <sunilvl@...tanamicro.com>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
Cc: Haibo Xu <xiaobo55x@...il.com>, "Xu, Haibo1" <haibo1.xu@...el.com>,
"ajones@...tanamicro.com" <ajones@...tanamicro.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
"Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@...el.com>,
Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>,
Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>,
Alexandre Ghiti <alexghiti@...osinc.com>,
Greentime Hu <greentime.hu@...ive.com>,
Charlie Jenkins <charlie@...osinc.com>,
Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
Zong Li <zong.li@...ive.com>, Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@...nel.org>,
Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>,
Clément Léger <cleger@...osinc.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Chen Jiahao <chenjiahao16@...wei.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
"Russell King (Oracle)" <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>,
Evan Green <evan@...osinc.com>,
Samuel Holland <samuel.holland@...ive.com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, Anup Patel <apatel@...tanamicro.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>, Yuntao Wang <ytcoode@...il.com>,
"Schofield, Alison" <alison.schofield@...el.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
"linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
"acpica-devel@...ts.linux.dev" <acpica-devel@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] ACPI: RISCV: Enable ACPI based NUMA
On Mon, Apr 01, 2024 at 04:57:30PM +0000, Luck, Tony wrote:
> >> If the firmware didn't provide the SRAT/SLIT on ACPI based systems, then
> >> there will be a message "Failed to initialise from firmware" from
> >> arch_acpi_numa_init(). This is not specific to RISC-V. But I am
> >> wondering why should it be pr_info instead of pr_debug.
> >>
> >
> > My understanding is maybe it just wants to expose explicit logs to
> > avoid any potential bugs from FW or Kernel.
>
> There are lots of ACPI enabled systems that aren't NUMA (single
> socket servers, desktops, laptops). Making this "pr_info()" would just
> add noise to the boot on all of those.
>
Exactly. But this is an existing pr_info message across architectures.
My suggestion is to add one more patch in this series to convert
this to pr_debug unless someone has strong reason to keep it pr_info.
Thanks,
Sunil
Powered by blists - more mailing lists