* [PATCH] drivers/perf: arm_pmu: make info messages more verbose
@ 2016-01-12 8:22 Dirk Behme
2016-02-01 16:43 ` Dirk Behme
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Dirk Behme @ 2016-01-12 8:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On a big.LITTLE system e.g. with Cortex A57 and A53 in case not all cores
are online at PMU probe time we might get
hw perfevents: failed to probe PMU!
hw perfevents: failed to register PMU devices!
making it unclear which cores failed, here.
Add the name of the PMU which failed resulting in a more verbose and
helpful message
hw perfevents: armv8_cortex_a53: failed to probe PMU!
hw perfevents: armv8_cortex_a53: failed to register PMU devices!
Signed-off-by: Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@de.bosch.com>
---
drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c b/drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c
index be3755c..fc1f06f 100644
--- a/drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c
+++ b/drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c
@@ -904,7 +904,7 @@ int arm_pmu_device_probe(struct platform_device *pdev,
}
if (ret) {
- pr_info("failed to probe PMU!\n");
+ pr_info("%s: failed to probe PMU!\n", pmu->name);
goto out_free;
}
@@ -921,7 +921,7 @@ int arm_pmu_device_probe(struct platform_device *pdev,
out_destroy:
cpu_pmu_destroy(pmu);
out_free:
- pr_info("failed to register PMU devices!\n");
+ pr_info("%s: failed to register PMU devices!\n", pmu->name);
kfree(pmu);
return ret;
}
--
2.5.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] drivers/perf: arm_pmu: make info messages more verbose
2016-01-12 8:22 [PATCH] drivers/perf: arm_pmu: make info messages more verbose Dirk Behme
@ 2016-02-01 16:43 ` Dirk Behme
2016-02-01 16:49 ` Mark Rutland
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Dirk Behme @ 2016-02-01 16:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 12.01.2016 09:22, Dirk Behme wrote:
> On a big.LITTLE system e.g. with Cortex A57 and A53 in case not all cores
> are online at PMU probe time we might get
>
> hw perfevents: failed to probe PMU!
> hw perfevents: failed to register PMU devices!
>
> making it unclear which cores failed, here.
>
> Add the name of the PMU which failed resulting in a more verbose and
> helpful message
>
> hw perfevents: armv8_cortex_a53: failed to probe PMU!
> hw perfevents: armv8_cortex_a53: failed to register PMU devices!
>
> Signed-off-by: Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@de.bosch.com>
> ---
> drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c b/drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c
> index be3755c..fc1f06f 100644
> --- a/drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c
> +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c
> @@ -904,7 +904,7 @@ int arm_pmu_device_probe(struct platform_device *pdev,
> }
>
> if (ret) {
> - pr_info("failed to probe PMU!\n");
> + pr_info("%s: failed to probe PMU!\n", pmu->name);
> goto out_free;
> }
>
> @@ -921,7 +921,7 @@ int arm_pmu_device_probe(struct platform_device *pdev,
> out_destroy:
> cpu_pmu_destroy(pmu);
> out_free:
> - pr_info("failed to register PMU devices!\n");
> + pr_info("%s: failed to register PMU devices!\n", pmu->name);
> kfree(pmu);
> return ret;
> }
Any comments on this?
If not, how to get this applied?
Best regards
Dirk
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] drivers/perf: arm_pmu: make info messages more verbose
2016-02-01 16:43 ` Dirk Behme
@ 2016-02-01 16:49 ` Mark Rutland
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Mark Rutland @ 2016-02-01 16:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 05:43:23PM +0100, Dirk Behme wrote:
> On 12.01.2016 09:22, Dirk Behme wrote:
> >On a big.LITTLE system e.g. with Cortex A57 and A53 in case not all cores
> >are online at PMU probe time we might get
> >
> >hw perfevents: failed to probe PMU!
> >hw perfevents: failed to register PMU devices!
> >
> >making it unclear which cores failed, here.
> >
> >Add the name of the PMU which failed resulting in a more verbose and
> >helpful message
> >
> >hw perfevents: armv8_cortex_a53: failed to probe PMU!
> >hw perfevents: armv8_cortex_a53: failed to register PMU devices!
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@de.bosch.com>
> >---
> > drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> >diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c b/drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c
> >index be3755c..fc1f06f 100644
> >--- a/drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c
> >+++ b/drivers/perf/arm_pmu.c
> >@@ -904,7 +904,7 @@ int arm_pmu_device_probe(struct platform_device *pdev,
> > }
> >
> > if (ret) {
> >- pr_info("failed to probe PMU!\n");
> >+ pr_info("%s: failed to probe PMU!\n", pmu->name);
> > goto out_free;
> > }
> >
> >@@ -921,7 +921,7 @@ int arm_pmu_device_probe(struct platform_device *pdev,
> > out_destroy:
> > cpu_pmu_destroy(pmu);
> > out_free:
> >- pr_info("failed to register PMU devices!\n");
> >+ pr_info("%s: failed to register PMU devices!\n", pmu->name);
> > kfree(pmu);
> > return ret;
> > }
>
>
> Any comments on this?
While this tells us that we didn't probe a particular PMU, it doesn't
tell us _why_.
We also shouldn't use pmu->name, as if we failed to find anything in the
match table, that'll be NULL. It would be better to use the full node
name from DT.
> If not, how to get this applied?
You'll need to Cc the maintainer (Will Deacon). I've added him to Cc.
Thanks,
Mark.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-02-01 16:49 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-01-12 8:22 [PATCH] drivers/perf: arm_pmu: make info messages more verbose Dirk Behme
2016-02-01 16:43 ` Dirk Behme
2016-02-01 16:49 ` Mark Rutland
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).