From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C649FC2BA18 for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2024 05:41:52 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Message-ID:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date: MIME-Version:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=1hA4dCOLp0zx4KWYxG86LNj6SzPfCiUAfc/2NfNSI7k=; b=XHafNQ1clqQrAQxk4QGY92NAS1 Zi9a3pGOjFSMEk0FMtDdF4j8O1Ch5MVdCIDcc2RaHvClK15kQMzdz7O85rnBJ5eEw0XLdfEk1YjWx f5R2d5Swy/6BU16yQy3ZNiygNHEGOOfeyM5+PONdnNyfmDMUyV/KJX5FOn/CzOzdOyiHZ8/Yp0Eg4 RtomvtzWaRy4tmLINxPaTHCn2xnu02kkVTQ879k93FTY7vM8w75r1wEdJH95ch11Wh/9LyS9Uvpav r7j1knseKfdnZ5rNJ64A2jF8SEbxKpXKRAWbfzadNi9Fm1kguMSKhOrKnAIdR4V0vbmVbanaO4oUZ tNQLOd+A==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1sLFys-0000000DOpJ-3L4P; Sun, 23 Jun 2024 05:41:38 +0000 Received: from mail.manjaro.org ([116.203.91.91]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1sLFyn-0000000DOon-1G4e; Sun, 23 Jun 2024 05:41:35 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=manjaro.org; s=2021; t=1719121291; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=1hA4dCOLp0zx4KWYxG86LNj6SzPfCiUAfc/2NfNSI7k=; b=bZMlifUds8UpGha6YTfwdj9vQC190I7o1RV82fY5Skw4kMEFmh/mtP6MrcJXK1S8Y1zquM IOk8O3Z9h7TaaENQfH//dhVjci+kZj9+PMgcZSpGlFuzG1XQskmgPUHL6yvz/uQNid3Yfg LuzY+iXeerazKvlIjCorkz2WGz4g2FsAKQIOyI1Sn5rkVp38F1IlF9+x3su2VL4mWP/H8i PBEcJBiTT6US6wStHFLErWiXJ9KT8oNRZ98ODDJ7OPkwTepFStaekpU6UywFDBJpZz0aQw 1zHc2YCYD4G4mQ9XUgQjpS9rLmODGVRYd9APv3gtxklUsHztj9t3p76jEzbAmw== Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2024 07:41:28 +0200 From: Dragan Simic To: =?UTF-8?Q?Uwe_Kleine-K=C3=B6nig?= Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Heiko_St=C3=BCbner?= , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Daniel Golle , Aurelien Jarno , Olivia Mackall , Herbert Xu , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Philipp Zabel , Sebastian Reichel , Anand Moon , Sascha Hauer , Martin Kaiser , Ard Biesheuvel , linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] hwrng: add Rockchip SoC hwrng driver In-Reply-To: <6u4bgwemukkpjvregtvrhdarelvy4rf76n5dv5oiclbyh4q7gd@b776tut4a6ki> References: <07fba45d99e9eabf9bcca71b86651074@manjaro.org> <3660160.WbyNdk4fJJ@diego> <6u4bgwemukkpjvregtvrhdarelvy4rf76n5dv5oiclbyh4q7gd@b776tut4a6ki> Message-ID: X-Sender: dsimic@manjaro.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Authentication-Results: ORIGINATING; auth=pass smtp.auth=dsimic@manjaro.org smtp.mailfrom=dsimic@manjaro.org X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20240622_224133_952052_168023BD X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 25.47 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Hello Uwe, On 2024-06-23 02:20, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > On Sat, Jun 22, 2024 at 10:45:22PM +0200, Dragan Simic wrote: >> On 2024-06-22 22:26, Heiko Stübner wrote: >> > Am Samstag, 22. Juni 2024, 12:29:33 CEST schrieb Dragan Simic: >> > > On 2024-06-22 00:16, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: >> > > > On 6/21/24 20:13, Dragan Simic wrote: >> > > >> On 2024-06-21 11:57, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> > > >>> On 21/06/2024 03:25, Daniel Golle wrote: >> > > >>>> + dev_info(&pdev->dev, "Registered Rockchip hwrng\n"); >> > > >>> >> > > >>> Drop, driver should be silent on success. >> > > >> >> > [...] >> > So really this message should be dropped or at least as Uwe suggests >> > made a dev_dbg. >> >> As a note, "dmesg --level=err,warn", for example, is rather useful >> when it comes to filtering the kernel messages to see only those that >> are signs of a trouble. > > IMHO it's a bit sad, that there is such a long thread about something > so > trivial, but I want to make a few points: > > - not all dmesg implementations support this: > > root@machine:~ dmesg --level=err,warn > dmesg: unrecognized option '--level=err,warn' > BusyBox v1.36.1 () multi-call binary. > > Usage: dmesg [-cr] [-n LEVEL] [-s SIZE] > > Print or control the kernel ring buffer > > -c Clear ring buffer after printing > -n LEVEL Set console logging level > -s SIZE Buffer size > -r Print raw message buffer > > - Your argument that the output of this dev_info can easily be ignored > is a very weak reason to keep it. > > - I personally consider it hard sometimes to accept feedback if I > think > it's wrong and there is a good reason to do it the way I want it. > But there are now three people opposing your position, who brought > forward (IMHO) good reasons and even a constructive alternative was > presented. Please stay open minded while weighting the options. > The questions to ask here include: > > - How many people care for this message? During every boot? Is it > maybe enough for these people to check in /sys if the device > probed successfully? Or maybe even the absence of an error > message > is enough? > - How many people get this message and don't care about the > presented information? How many people are even annoyed by it? > - Is the delay and memory usage introduced by this message > justified > then, even if it's small? I'm sorry if my responses caused any inconvenience. I find most of your points totally valid, but there are a couple of them I could continue arguing about. Though, as you also pointed out, my opinion has been already outvoted, so I'll remain silent.