Re: [PATCH 5/9] pwm: spear: Remove unnecessary OOM messages

[Jingoo Han <jg1.han@samsung.com>]

On Thursday, March 06, 2014 1:30 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> On Thursday 06 March 2014 00:17:38 Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 5 March 2014 19:00, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > Sure, but I wasn't sure whether all error code paths in kmalloc() resulted
> > > in an OOM message. For instance, the following code path results in an
> > > allocation failure but doesn't seem to print an OOM message:
> > >
> > > kmalloc
> > > __kmalloc
> > > __do_kmalloc
> > > slab_alloc
> > > slab_should_failslab
> > > should_failslab
> > > should_fail
> > >
> > > A bit far-fetched possibly as it requires fault injection. I haven't found
> > > any other such code path, but my understanding of that code is a bit
> > > limited.
> >
> > In that case should we actually accept patches like this at all? As they
> > might be ending up removing some useful print messages?
> 
> Dan has pointed out that I've missed the fail_dump() call in should_fail().
> One could argue that fail_dump() wouldn't print any message if the fault
> injection framework has verbosity set to 0, but I suppose we can assume that
> people using the fault injection framework know what they're doing.
> 
> All other error paths in kmalloc() seem to result in a message being printed.
> I might have missed something, but I can trust the developers who know that
> code much better than I do that kmalloc() is designed to print an error
> message in all error paths. Any failure to print a message would be a
> kmalloc() bug that should be fixed, and getting rid of the allocation error
> messages in drivers would seem like a nice cleanup to me.

Hi Thierry Reding,

There seems to be no objection. :-)
Would you accept these patches?
Thank you.

Best regards,
Jingoo Han