From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751090Ab3HSIv1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Aug 2013 04:51:27 -0400 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:27821 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750770Ab3HSIv0 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Aug 2013 04:51:26 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,912,1367996400"; d="scan'208";a="364763551" Message-ID: <1376902266.403.152.camel@smile> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] dmaengine: make dmatest less noisy From: Andy Shevchenko To: Dan Williams Cc: Linus Walleij , Vinod Koul , Linux Kernel Mailing List Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 11:51:06 +0300 In-Reply-To: References: <1376900724-9636-1-git-send-email-linus.walleij@linaro.org> <1376901429.403.150.camel@smile> Organization: Intel Finland Oy Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Mailer: Evolution 3.4.4-3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2013-08-19 at 01:49 -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 1:37 AM, Andy Shevchenko > wrote: > > On Mon, 2013-08-19 at 10:25 +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > >> Commit 95019c8c5 "dmatest: gather test results in the linked list" > >> started to warning whenever we add results to a test thread. > >> A warning for something completely normal? This is just cluttering > >> my terminal. Move to debug prints. > >> > >> Cc: Andy Shevchenko > >> Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij > > > >> --- a/drivers/dma/dmatest.c > >> +++ b/drivers/dma/dmatest.c > > > >> @@ -406,7 +406,7 @@ static int thread_result_add(struct dmatest_info *info, > >> list_add_tail(&tr->node, &r->results); > >> mutex_unlock(&info->results_lock); > >> > >> - pr_warn("%s\n", thread_result_get(r->name, tr)); > >> + pr_debug("%s\n", thread_result_get(r->name, tr)); > > > > This is the idea behind original DMATEST module logic. > > As far as I understand we would like to have them as warnings in case > > when driver is compiled in and tests are run from the beginning. > > > > Though, I sent a correction patch that moves "No error" messages to > > debug level which, I think, makes sense. I don't know why Dan still keep > > silent on my last message in the discussion [1]. > > > > Applying them now, and yes I agree with your patch to take this back > to the original implementation of not squawking on success. Thank you! -- Andy Shevchenko Intel Finland Oy