Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] cpufreq: scmi-cpufreq: Log number of perf domains

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] Misleading debug log message contradicts driver behavior and commit message.
--

commit 1a4bf472420109c67d582c98f4a85ffbf1fdd048
Author: Alex Tran <alex.tran@oss.qualcomm.com>

cpufreq: scmi-cpufreq: Log number of perf domains

This commit adds a debug log to the SCMI cpufreq driver to report the
number of performance domains discovered from firmware.

> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
> index 4edb4f7a8aa97..f4cf59d862c61 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
> @@ -468,9 +468,12 @@ static int scmi_cpufreq_probe(struct scmi_device *sdev)

[ ... ]

>  	if (ret) {
>  		dev_err(dev, "%s: registering cpufreq failed, err: %d\n",
>  			__func__, ret);
> +		return ret;
>  	}
>  
> -	return ret;
> +	dev_dbg(dev, "Initialized %d performance domains\n",
> +		 perf_ops->num_domains_get(ph));

The commit message states the intent is to log the number of domains
"discovered from firmware". Does the wording "Initialized" in this log
message accurately reflect the driver's behavior?

The driver primarily registers the cpufreq driver and does not actually
initialize the SCMI performance domains. Additionally, num_domains_get()
returns the total count of SCMI performance domains exposed by the
firmware, which may also include non-CPU domains like GPUs.

Would a word like "Discovered" be more appropriate here?

> +	return 0;
>  }

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260513-scmi-client-probe-log-v2-0-36607e9dd540@oss.qualcomm.com?part=2