Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] nand: omap2: Replace pr_err with dev_err

[Roger Quadros <rogerq@ti.com>]

On 09/08/2014 05:35 PM, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
> On 08 Sep 02:57 PM, Roger Quadros wrote:
>> Hi Ezequiel,
>>
>> On 09/08/2014 02:27 PM, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
>>> Usage of pr_err is frowned upon, so replace it with dev_err.
>>> Aditionally, the message on nand_bch_init() error is redundant,
>>> since proper error is showed if the function fails.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c | 26 ++++++++++++++------------
>>>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c
>>> index f97a4ff..eb5e898 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c
>>> @@ -1375,7 +1375,7 @@ static int omap_elm_correct_data(struct mtd_info *mtd, u_char *data,
>>>  		erased_ecc_vec = bch16_vector;
>>>  		break;
>>>  	default:
>>> -		pr_err("invalid driver configuration\n");
>>> +		dev_err(&info->pdev->dev, "invalid driver configuration\n");
>>>  		return -EINVAL;
>>>  	}
>>>  
>>> @@ -1446,7 +1446,8 @@ static int omap_elm_correct_data(struct mtd_info *mtd, u_char *data,
>>>  	err = 0;
>>>  	for (i = 0; i < eccsteps; i++) {
>>>  		if (err_vec[i].error_uncorrectable) {
>>> -			pr_err("nand: uncorrectable bit-flips found\n");
>>> +			dev_err(&info->pdev->dev,
>>> +				"uncorrectable bit-flips found\n");
>>>  			err = -EBADMSG;
>>>  		} else if (err_vec[i].error_reported) {
>>>  			for (j = 0; j < err_vec[i].error_count; j++) {
>>> @@ -1483,8 +1484,9 @@ static int omap_elm_correct_data(struct mtd_info *mtd, u_char *data,
>>>  							1 << bit_pos;
>>>  					}
>>>  				} else {
>>> -					pr_err("invalid bit-flip @ %d:%d\n",
>>> -							 byte_pos, bit_pos);
>>> +					dev_err(&info->pdev->dev,
>>> +						"invalid bit-flip @ %d:%d\n",
>>> +						byte_pos, bit_pos);
>>>  					err = -EBADMSG;
>>>  				}
>>>  			}
>>> @@ -1598,13 +1600,13 @@ static bool is_elm_present(struct omap_nand_info *info,
>>>  
>>>  	/* check whether elm-id is passed via DT */
>>>  	if (!elm_node) {
>>> -		pr_err("nand: error: ELM DT node not found\n");
>>> +		dev_err(&info->pdev->dev, "ELM devicetree node not found\n");
>>>  		return false;
>>>  	}
>>>  	pdev = of_find_device_by_node(elm_node);
>>>  	/* check whether ELM device is registered */
>>>  	if (!pdev) {
>>> -		pr_err("nand: error: ELM device not found\n");
>>> +		dev_err(&info->pdev->dev, "ELM device not found\n");
>>>  		return false;
>>>  	}
>>>  	/* ELM module available, now configure it */
>>> @@ -1734,14 +1736,14 @@ static int omap_nand_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>  	/* scan NAND device connected to chip controller */
>>>  	nand_chip->options |= pdata->devsize & NAND_BUSWIDTH_16;
>>>  	if (nand_scan_ident(mtd, 1, NULL)) {
>>> -		pr_err("nand device scan failed, may be bus-width mismatch\n");
>>> +		dev_err(&info->pdev->dev, "scan failed, may be bus-width mismatch\n");
>>>  		err = -ENXIO;
>>>  		goto return_error;
>>>  	}
>>>  
>>>  	/* check for small page devices */
>>>  	if ((mtd->oobsize < 64) && (pdata->ecc_opt != OMAP_ECC_HAM1_CODE_HW)) {
>>> -		pr_err("small page devices are not supported\n");
>>> +		dev_err(&info->pdev->dev, "small page devices are not supported\n");
>>>  		err = -EINVAL;
>>>  		goto return_error;
>>>  	}
>>> @@ -1959,7 +1961,6 @@ static int omap_nand_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>  							nand_chip->ecc.bytes,
>>>  							&ecclayout);
>>>  		if (!nand_chip->ecc.priv) {
>>> -			pr_err("nand: error: unable to use s/w BCH library\n");
>>
>> Where would the error be printed in this case?
>>
> 
> Well, nand_bch_init() has a lot of messages for the errors, but I just noticed
> some cases where there's no message printed. Would you prefer to leave these
> untouched?

Yes, let's leave these messages here to tackle the cases where error messages aren't printed
in nand_bch_init().

> 
>> I also noticed a similar message in the OMAP_ECC_BCH4_CODE_HW_DETECTION_SW case.
>> And it seems to be missing a "goto return_error" there.
>>
> 
> Argh, right. I'll have to resend this one.
> 

cheers,
-roger