From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] dmaengine: core: Introduce new, universal API to request a channel Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2015 16:45:38 +0100 Message-ID: <4696298.Uj40YldTVN@wuerfel> References: <1449153192-9082-1-git-send-email-peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> <6922343.04ZpTXZq7O@wuerfel> <566062E7.2020705@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <566062E7.2020705@ti.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Peter Ujfalusi Cc: vinod.koul@intel.com, andy.shevchenko@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dmaengine@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, nsekhar@ti.com, tony@atomide.com List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 03 December 2015 17:42:31 Peter Ujfalusi wrote: > > > >> + if (chan) { > >> + /* Valid channel found */ > >> + if (!IS_ERR(chan) || PTR_ERR(chan) == -EPROBE_DEFER) > >> + return chan; > >> + > >> + pr_warn("%s: %s DMA request failed, falling back to legacy\n", > >> + __func__, dev->of_node ? "OF" : "ACPI"); > >> + } > > > > Maybe print the error code as well? > > Or remove the print altogether? > In a healthy system we will either get the channel or the EPROBE_DEFER, in > case of the platforms where the DT lookup does not work we expect errors and > it is 'normal'. > I think if we fail via DT/ACPI and we fail with legacy also then the client > driver will say something about it anyways, or deal with it as it see fits. > Right, that works too. It took me a while to figure out that we only get there on systems that have ACPI or DT enabled for a particular device, but where the normal method failed, rather than also systems with traditional board files. Without the pr_warn, I would not have needed to think about this ;-) Arnd