From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2C24C433EF for ; Sat, 7 May 2022 01:23:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1445163AbiEGB1T (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 May 2022 21:27:19 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:48574 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S236738AbiEGB1T (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 May 2022 21:27:19 -0400 Received: from mga18.intel.com (mga18.intel.com [134.134.136.126]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1978D7092F; Fri, 6 May 2022 18:23:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1651886613; x=1683422613; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to: references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5QLsHFyXUFmImXTHj9gckTtQ5H1fnqGlBkqRwszLNuw=; b=iGzPCr9mqPLEZUqqMPEa3CS4Q+dFActVs4L7PseG4fMkh6DjcJOAw8T/ H3ASHs41d/rsXbsQdhOxq/Ym6sYK51Xni8L1cfrkdDLvq2cPW07B5x3YY NwpzCMwKGFROzRxrEUrqVkqUwx1xxAqoMaQ2xX2PQNl8kBvRUYMxpGEfT 3jKoNVyp7pl476HgxqkCA+xMb2dixXOMQA0qjR8sKDzJBxam9tSELdWez 8elsAvCb0ube6CRGUWTZCLn0A6gbDDQqP1j/zsUwdaDVT07rxCsIpCx0h up4qBa4gHxtJNoN/7yiWX1Zbbjn3HyUl1FYzH13AA9//qsOOeiLFz8KdB g==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6400,9594,10339"; a="250631339" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.91,205,1647327600"; d="scan'208";a="250631339" Received: from orsmga006.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.51]) by orsmga106.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 May 2022 18:23:32 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.91,205,1647327600"; d="scan'208";a="538137724" Received: from xinmeigo-mobl.ccr.corp.intel.com ([10.255.29.106]) by orsmga006-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 May 2022 18:23:28 -0700 Message-ID: <163750123fe8868a34f963daf137d592edc0acd7.camel@intel.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] wil6210: remove debug message for unsupported PM event From: Zhang Rui To: Kalle Valo Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net, alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, daniel.lezcano@linaro.org, mat.jonczyk@o2.pl, sumeet.r.pawnikar@intel.com, len.brown@intel.com Date: Sat, 07 May 2022 09:23:26 +0800 In-Reply-To: <87tua292pp.fsf@kernel.org> References: <20220505015814.3727692-1-rui.zhang@intel.com> <20220505015814.3727692-6-rui.zhang@intel.com> <875ymkzj9e.fsf@kernel.org> <2358992684eb37823378cb48de2775620ee42031.camel@intel.com> <87tua292pp.fsf@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5-0ubuntu0.18.04.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2022-05-06 at 17:04 +0300, Kalle Valo wrote: > Zhang Rui writes: > > > Hi, Kalle, > > > > thanks for the quick response. > > > > On Thu, 2022-05-05 at 07:38 +0300, Kalle Valo wrote: > > > Zhang Rui writes: > > > > > > > Remove the useless debug message for unsupported PM event > > > > because > > > > it is > > > > noop in current code, and it gives a warning when a new event > > > > is > > > > introduced, which it doesn't care. > > > > > > It's a debug message, not a warning, and only visible when debug > > > messages are enabled. Why do you want to remove it? > > > > I'm concerning that people will report problems when they see new > > messages which never shows up previously. > > > > Deleting or keeping this message are both okay to me. But patch 6/7 > > indeed introduces a change to this piece of code and it's better > > for > > you to be aware of it before people starts to complain. > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui > > > > Tested-by: Sumeet Pawnikar > > > > > > Is this really tested on a wil6210 device? Not that it matters, > > > just > > > surprised to see a Tested-by for a wil6210 patch. It's not really > > > common > > > hardware. > > > > No, we just tested the whole patch series on a Dell 9360 laptop, > > and a > > series of internal test machines. I didn't check if any of them has > > this device or not. Maybe I should remove the tested by in this > > case? > > I think it's best to drop this wil6210 patch. The driver is orphaned > anyway and if anyone complains, they will do that to me :) > Sure, I will drop this patch. Thanks for reviewing. -rui