Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] hwrng: add Rockchip SoC hwrng driver

From: Dragan Simic <dsimic@manjaro.org>
To: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com>
Cc: "Heiko Stübner" <heiko@sntech.de>,
	"Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzk@kernel.org>,
	"Daniel Golle" <daniel@makrotopia.org>,
	"Aurelien Jarno" <aurelien@aurel32.net>,
	"Olivia Mackall" <olivia@selenic.com>,
	"Herbert Xu" <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
	"Rob Herring" <robh@kernel.org>,
	"Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
	"Conor Dooley" <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
	"Philipp Zabel" <p.zabel@pengutronix.de>,
	"Sebastian Reichel" <sebastian.reichel@collabora.com>,
	"Anand Moon" <linux.amoon@gmail.com>,
	"Sascha Hauer" <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
	"Martin Kaiser" <martin@kaiser.cx>,
	"Ard Biesheuvel" <ardb@kernel.org>,
	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
Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2024 07:41:28 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <adcfb712619033fb2e55f25a512f375a@manjaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6u4bgwemukkpjvregtvrhdarelvy4rf76n5dv5oiclbyh4q7gd@b776tut4a6ki>

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.

_______________________________________________
Linux-rockchip mailing list
Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip