[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aCXzPGvPayVyiMHG@pluto>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2025 14:59:24 +0100
From: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>
To: long.yunjian@....com.cn
Cc: sudeep.holla@....com, cristian.marussi@....com, peng.fan@....com,
justin.chen@...adcom.com, florian.fainelli@...adcom.com,
arm-scmi@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, fang.yumeng@....com.cn,
mou.yi@....com.cn, ouyang.maochun@....com.cn, xu.lifeng1@....com.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Use dev_err_probe() simplify the code
On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 08:38:55PM +0800, long.yunjian@....com.cn wrote:
> From: Yumeng Fang <fang.yumeng@....com.cn>
>
Hi,
> In the probe path, dev_err() can be replaced with dev_err_probe()
> which will check if error code is -EPROBE_DEFER and prints the
> error name. It also sets the defer probe reason which can be
> checked later through debugfs.
All true...but...if you look at the main scmi_probe() function all of these
failures are trapped at that level currently on the return path...
see the call chain from
scmi_probe()
....
ret = scmi_channels_setup(info);
...
...so your probe errors will be overridden there with a more generic message
left in debugfs at the top level.
Thanks,
Cristian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists