From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matt Fleming Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/efi-bgrt: Switch all pr_err() to pr_notice() for invalid BGRT Date: Tue, 3 May 2016 20:02:13 +0100 Message-ID: <20160503190213.GC2839@codeblueprint.co.uk> References: <1462297624-3003-1-git-send-email-jwboyer@fedoraproject.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1462297624-3003-1-git-send-email-jwboyer-rxtnV0ftBwyoClj4AeEUq9i2O/JbrIOy@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-efi-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Josh Boyer Cc: Josh Triplett , linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 03 May, at 01:47:04PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > The promise of pretty boot splashes from firmware via BGRT was at > best only that; a promise. The kernel diligently checks to make > sure the BGRT data firmware gives it is valid, and dutifully warns > the user when it isn't. However, it does so via the pr_err log > level which seems unnecessary. The user cannot do anything about > this and there really isn't an error on the part of Linux to > correct. > > This lowers the log level by using pr_notice instead. Users will > no longer have their boot process uglified by the kernel reminding > us that firmware can and often is broken when the 'quiet' kernel > parameter is specified. Ironic, considering BGRT is supposed to > make boot pretty to begin with. > > Signed-off-by: Josh Boyer > --- > > v2: Switch to using pr_notice instead of pr_debug > > arch/x86/platform/efi/efi-bgrt.c | 18 +++++++++--------- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > Applied. Thanks everyone!