[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20240605231156.22934-1-jain.abhinav177@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2024 23:11:56 +0000
From: Abhinav Jain <jain.abhinav177@...il.com>
To: helgaas@...nel.org
Cc: bhelgaas@...gle.com,
jain.abhinav177@...il.com,
javier.carrasco.cruz@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
mahesh@...ux.ibm.com,
oohall@...il.com,
skhan@...uxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] PCI/AER: Print error message as per the TODO
On Wed, 5 Jun 2024 16:58:48 -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> - It doesn't apply to -rc1 (the TODO message is missing). In PCI,
> we normally apply patches on topic branches based on -rc1.
Thank you for the detailed feedback. I was looking at mainline only.
> - The subject should be more specific so it makes sense all by
> itself, e.g., "Log note if we find too many devices with errors"
> - Add period at end of sentence in commit log.
> - Move historical notes (v1 URL, changes since v1) below the "---"
> line so they don't get included in the commit log.
I have included these changes to the v3. Please find it here:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240605230954.22911-1-jain.abhinav177@gmail.com/
> - __func__ is not relevant here -- that's generally a debugging
> thing. We can find the function by searching for the message
> text. In cases like this, I'd rather have something that helps
> identify a *device* that's related to the message, e.g., the
> pci_dev in this case. So I'd suggest pci_err(dev, "...") here.
> - I'd keep pci_err() instead of switching to pr_notice(). If we get
> this message, we should re-think the way we collect this
> information, so I want to hear about it.
I understand, this helped me get a clear picture of what needs to be
done. I have accordingly added two pci_err for the same. Please review.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists