From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.s-osg.org (lists.s-osg.org. [54.187.51.154]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 12si3404943pfb.1.2016.03.14.12.59.40 for ; Mon, 14 Mar 2016 12:59:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rtc-linux] Re: [PATCH] rtc: s3c: Don't print an error on probe deferral To: Joe Perches , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <1457982308-29848-1-git-send-email-javier@osg.samsung.com> <1457982675.11972.119.camel@perches.com> <56E7119B.9060900@osg.samsung.com> <1457984317.11972.123.camel@perches.com> From: Javier Martinez Canillas Cc: Alexandre Belloni , linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, Krzysztof Kozlowski , rtc-linux@googlegroups.com Message-ID: <56E71825.5070104@osg.samsung.com> Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 16:59:33 -0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1457984317.11972.123.camel@perches.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Reply-To: rtc-linux@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , Hello Joe, On 03/14/2016 04:38 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > On Mon, 2016-03-14 at 16:31 -0300, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: >> On 03/14/2016 04:11 PM, Joe Perches wrote:> > On Mon, 2016-03-14 at 16:05 -0300, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: >>>> >>>> The clock and source clock looked up by the driver may not be available >>>> just because the clock controller driver was not probed yet so printing >>>> an error in this case is not correct and only adds confusion to users. >>>> >>>> However, knowing that a driver's probe was deferred may be useful so it >>>> can be printed as debug information. >>> [] >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-s3c.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-s3c.c >>> [] >>>> >>>> @@ -501,18 +501,27 @@ static int s3c_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >>>> >>>> info->rtc_clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "rtc"); >>>> if (IS_ERR(info->rtc_clk)) { >>>> - dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to find rtc clock\n"); >>>> - return PTR_ERR(info->rtc_clk); >>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(info->rtc_clk); >>>> + if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER) >>>> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to find rtc clock\n"); >>>> + else >>>> + dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "probe deferred due rtc clock\n"); >>>> + return ret; >>>> } >>>> clk_prepare_enable(info->rtc_clk); >>>> >>>> if (info->data->needs_src_clk) { >>>> info->rtc_src_clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "rtc_src"); >>>> if (IS_ERR(info->rtc_src_clk)) { >>>> - dev_err(&pdev->dev, >>>> - "failed to find rtc source clock\n"); >>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(info->rtc_src_clk); >>>> + if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER) >>>> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, >>>> + "failed to find rtc source clock\n"); >>>> + else >>>> + dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, >>>> + "probe deferred due rtc source clock\n"); >>>> clk_disable_unprepare(info->rtc_clk); >>>> - return PTR_ERR(info->rtc_src_clk); >>>> + return ret; >>>> } >>>> clk_prepare_enable(info->rtc_src_clk); >>>> } >>> Maybe the debug logging messages could be object->action like: >>> >>> rtc clock probe deferred >>> rtc source clock probe deferred >>> >> I found your suggested messages harder to read and more confusing. The >> action that happens is a probe function deferral and that is caused by >> a missing resource needed by the driver (clocks in this case). >> >> But your messages seems to imply that the probe deferred action happens >> to a clock, it sounds like "rtc clock disabled" and that's not correct. > > OK, then please change "due" to "due to" or "for" in your messages > because they make little sense now. > I don't think they make little sense now since even a non-native english speaker like me can understand it :) But yes, it's cryptic at the very least. That's the problem with long text and the 80 char limit to make checkpatch.pl happy. I guess I can just move the message a little bit even if that will make to not be properly aligned. I'll wait a couple of days to see if there's any other feedback and repost. Best regards, -- Javier Martinez Canillas Open Source Group Samsung Research America -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to "rtc-linux". Membership options at http://groups.google.com/group/rtc-linux . Please read http://groups.google.com/group/rtc-linux/web/checklist before submitting a driver. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rtc-linux" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rtc-linux+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Javier Martinez Canillas Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc: s3c: Don't print an error on probe deferral Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 16:59:33 -0300 Message-ID: <56E71825.5070104@osg.samsung.com> References: <1457982308-29848-1-git-send-email-javier@osg.samsung.com> <1457982675.11972.119.camel@perches.com> <56E7119B.9060900@osg.samsung.com> <1457984317.11972.123.camel@perches.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from lists.s-osg.org ([54.187.51.154]:53809 "EHLO lists.s-osg.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752722AbcCNT7l (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Mar 2016 15:59:41 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1457984317.11972.123.camel@perches.com> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org To: Joe Perches , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Alexandre Belloni , linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, Krzysztof Kozlowski , rtc-linux@googlegroups.com Hello Joe, On 03/14/2016 04:38 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > On Mon, 2016-03-14 at 16:31 -0300, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: >> On 03/14/2016 04:11 PM, Joe Perches wrote:> > On Mon, 2016-03-14 at 16:05 -0300, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: >>>> >>>> The clock and source clock looked up by the driver may not be available >>>> just because the clock controller driver was not probed yet so printing >>>> an error in this case is not correct and only adds confusion to users. >>>> >>>> However, knowing that a driver's probe was deferred may be useful so it >>>> can be printed as debug information. >>> [] >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-s3c.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-s3c.c >>> [] >>>> >>>> @@ -501,18 +501,27 @@ static int s3c_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >>>> >>>> info->rtc_clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "rtc"); >>>> if (IS_ERR(info->rtc_clk)) { >>>> - dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to find rtc clock\n"); >>>> - return PTR_ERR(info->rtc_clk); >>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(info->rtc_clk); >>>> + if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER) >>>> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to find rtc clock\n"); >>>> + else >>>> + dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "probe deferred due rtc clock\n"); >>>> + return ret; >>>> } >>>> clk_prepare_enable(info->rtc_clk); >>>> >>>> if (info->data->needs_src_clk) { >>>> info->rtc_src_clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "rtc_src"); >>>> if (IS_ERR(info->rtc_src_clk)) { >>>> - dev_err(&pdev->dev, >>>> - "failed to find rtc source clock\n"); >>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(info->rtc_src_clk); >>>> + if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER) >>>> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, >>>> + "failed to find rtc source clock\n"); >>>> + else >>>> + dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, >>>> + "probe deferred due rtc source clock\n"); >>>> clk_disable_unprepare(info->rtc_clk); >>>> - return PTR_ERR(info->rtc_src_clk); >>>> + return ret; >>>> } >>>> clk_prepare_enable(info->rtc_src_clk); >>>> } >>> Maybe the debug logging messages could be object->action like: >>> >>> rtc clock probe deferred >>> rtc source clock probe deferred >>> >> I found your suggested messages harder to read and more confusing. The >> action that happens is a probe function deferral and that is caused by >> a missing resource needed by the driver (clocks in this case). >> >> But your messages seems to imply that the probe deferred action happens >> to a clock, it sounds like "rtc clock disabled" and that's not correct. > > OK, then please change "due" to "due to" or "for" in your messages > because they make little sense now. > I don't think they make little sense now since even a non-native english speaker like me can understand it :) But yes, it's cryptic at the very least. That's the problem with long text and the 80 char limit to make checkpatch.pl happy. I guess I can just move the message a little bit even if that will make to not be properly aligned. I'll wait a couple of days to see if there's any other feedback and repost. Best regards, -- Javier Martinez Canillas Open Source Group Samsung Research America