All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
To: Kalle Valo <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com>
Cc: linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@tieto.com>,
	"ath10k@lists.infradead.org" <ath10k@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath10k: unify warning messages in mac.c
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:37:54 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <531F49F2.3030408@candelatech.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87k3c1gf35.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com>

On 03/11/2014 04:16 AM, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Kalle Valo <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com> writes:
> 
>>> I think we should agree on one of the two approaches:
>>>
>>> a) start with a verb:
>>>
>>> "failed to add peer %pM on vdev %i: %d"
>>> "failed to initialize dfs pattern detector"
>>> "timed out while waiting for scan completion"
>>>
>>> b) start with a noun:
>>>
>>> "peer %pM on vdev %i could not be added: %d"
>>> "dfs pattern detector could not initialize"
>>> "scan timed out"
>>>
>>> These are still mixed.
>>>
>>> We could probably also limit the set of verbs, e.g. replace "could
>>> not" with "failed to" as it's practically the same thing (assuming we
>>> pick (a)).
>>
>> That's true. I would vote for option (a).
> 
> I didn't get any comments about Michal's proposal. Can I conclude from
> this that (a) above is ok for everyone?


I like (a), but I would also suggest giving user a clue as to the
severity.  Something starting with 'failed' or 'warning' is pretty obvious.

A timeout is less so..ie, how much of a problem is the timeout?

Thanks,
Ben

-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com


_______________________________________________
ath10k mailing list
ath10k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
To: Kalle Valo <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com>
Cc: Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@tieto.com>,
	linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	"ath10k@lists.infradead.org" <ath10k@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath10k: unify warning messages in mac.c
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:37:54 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <531F49F2.3030408@candelatech.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87k3c1gf35.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com>

On 03/11/2014 04:16 AM, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Kalle Valo <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com> writes:
> 
>>> I think we should agree on one of the two approaches:
>>>
>>> a) start with a verb:
>>>
>>> "failed to add peer %pM on vdev %i: %d"
>>> "failed to initialize dfs pattern detector"
>>> "timed out while waiting for scan completion"
>>>
>>> b) start with a noun:
>>>
>>> "peer %pM on vdev %i could not be added: %d"
>>> "dfs pattern detector could not initialize"
>>> "scan timed out"
>>>
>>> These are still mixed.
>>>
>>> We could probably also limit the set of verbs, e.g. replace "could
>>> not" with "failed to" as it's practically the same thing (assuming we
>>> pick (a)).
>>
>> That's true. I would vote for option (a).
> 
> I didn't get any comments about Michal's proposal. Can I conclude from
> this that (a) above is ok for everyone?


I like (a), but I would also suggest giving user a clue as to the
severity.  Something starting with 'failed' or 'warning' is pretty obvious.

A timeout is less so..ie, how much of a problem is the timeout?

Thanks,
Ben

-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com


  reply	other threads:[~2014-03-11 17:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-03-03 15:43 [PATCH] ath10k: unify warning messages in mac.c Kalle Valo
2014-03-03 15:43 ` Kalle Valo
2014-03-03 16:23 ` Michal Kazior
2014-03-03 16:23   ` Michal Kazior
2014-03-03 16:40   ` Kalle Valo
2014-03-03 16:40     ` Kalle Valo
2014-03-11 11:16     ` Kalle Valo
2014-03-11 11:16       ` Kalle Valo
2014-03-11 17:37       ` Ben Greear [this message]
2014-03-11 17:37         ` Ben Greear
2014-03-11 17:46         ` Joe Perches
2014-03-11 17:46           ` Joe Perches
2014-03-11 17:56           ` Ben Greear
2014-03-11 17:56             ` Ben Greear
2014-03-11 18:08             ` Joe Perches
2014-03-11 18:08               ` Joe Perches
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2014-03-24 15:00 Kalle Valo
2014-03-24 15:00 ` Kalle Valo

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=531F49F2.3030408@candelatech.com \
    --to=greearb@candelatech.com \
    --cc=ath10k@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=michal.kazior@tieto.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.