[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <54faf85c-38c8-45b6-ad5f-04b069891e24@cherry.de>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 18:55:39 +0100
From: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@...rry.de>
To: Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>
Cc: andy.yan@...k-chips.com, maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com,
mripard@...nel.org, tzimmermann@...e.de, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Heiko Stuebner <heiko.stuebner@...rry.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/rockchip: lvds: Hide scary error messages on
probe deferral
Hi Heiko,
On 2/28/25 6:45 PM, Heiko Stübner wrote:
> Am Freitag, 28. Februar 2025, 18:42:32 MEZ schrieb Quentin Schulz:
>> Hi Heiko,
>>
>> On 2/28/25 5:57 PM, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
>>> From: Heiko Stuebner <heiko.stuebner@...rry.de>
>>>
>>> Commit 52d11c863ac9 ("drm/rockchip: lvds: do not print scary message when
>>> probing defer") already started hiding scary messages that are not relevant
>>> if the requested supply just returned EPROBE_DEFER, but there are more
>>> possible sources - like the phy.
>>>
>>> So modernize the whole logging in the probe path by replacing the
>>> remaining deprecated DRM_DEV_ERROR with appropriate dev_err(_probe)
>>> and drm_err calls.
>>>
>>> The distinction here is that all messages talking about mishaps of the
>>> lvds element use dev_err(_probe) while messages caused by interaction
>>> with the main Rockchip drm-device use drm_err.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko.stuebner@...rry.de>
>
>>> @@ -604,8 +602,8 @@ static int rockchip_lvds_bind(struct device *dev, struct device *master,
>>>
>>> ret = drm_simple_encoder_init(drm_dev, encoder, DRM_MODE_ENCODER_LVDS);
>>> if (ret < 0) {
>>> - DRM_DEV_ERROR(drm_dev->dev,
>>> - "failed to initialize encoder: %d\n", ret);
>>> + drm_err(drm_dev,
>>> + "failed to initialize encoder: %d\n", ret);
>>
>> All the above are using dev_err, but starting here, it's drm_err, is
>> that on purpose?
>
> The last paragraph of the commit message was supposed to explain that
> (which it seemingly did poorly :-) ) :
>
Mmmm someone didn't read that commit log entirely. That someone
apologizes for the noise.
Cheers,
Quentin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists