Re: [PATCH 1/3] drm/i915: remove a few __i915_printk() uses

[Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>]

On Wed, 07 Aug 2024, Tvrtko Ursulin <tursulin@ursulin.net> wrote:
> On 06/08/2024 14:38, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> __i915_printk() does nothing for notice/info levels. Just use the
>> regular drm_notice() and drm_info() calls.
>
> "does nothing"? You mean does nothing _special_?

Yeah, does nothing in addition to the regular drm logging that we switch
to.

>
> The patch itself looks okay.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tvrtko
>
>> Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_utils.c | 10 +++++-----
>>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_utils.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_utils.c
>> index 6f9e7b354b54..bee32222f0fd 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_utils.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_utils.c
>> @@ -54,8 +54,8 @@ __i915_printk(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, const char *level,
>>   
>>   void add_taint_for_CI(struct drm_i915_private *i915, unsigned int taint)
>>   {
>> -	__i915_printk(i915, KERN_NOTICE, "CI tainted:%#x by %pS\n",
>> -		      taint, (void *)_RET_IP_);
>> +	drm_notice(&i915->drm, "CI tainted: %#x by %pS\n",
>> +		   taint, __builtin_return_address(0));
>>   
>>   	/* Failures that occur during fault injection testing are expected */
>>   	if (!i915_error_injected())
>> @@ -74,9 +74,9 @@ int __i915_inject_probe_error(struct drm_i915_private *i915, int err,
>>   	if (++i915_probe_fail_count < i915_modparams.inject_probe_failure)
>>   		return 0;
>>   
>> -	__i915_printk(i915, KERN_INFO,
>> -		      "Injecting failure %d at checkpoint %u [%s:%d]\n",
>> -		      err, i915_modparams.inject_probe_failure, func, line);
>> +	drm_info(&i915->drm, "Injecting failure %d at checkpoint %u [%s:%d]\n",
>> +		 err, i915_modparams.inject_probe_failure, func, line);
>> +
>>   	i915_modparams.inject_probe_failure = 0;
>>   	return err;
>>   }

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel