public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH] Driver core: Reduce the level of request_firmware() messages
@ 2010-02-27 20:43 Rafael J. Wysocki
  2010-02-28  3:13 ` Greg KH
  2010-02-28  4:43 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2010-02-27 20:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Greg KH; +Cc: LKML, Andrew Morton

From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>

The messages from _request_firmware() informing that firmware is
being requested or built-in firmware is going to be used are printed
at KERN_INFO, which produces lots of noise on systems with huge
numbers of AMD CPUs.  Reduce the level of these messages to
KERN_DEBUG to get rid of that noise.

Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
---
 drivers/base/firmware_class.c |    5 ++---
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Index: linux-2.6.32-SLE11-SP1/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.32-SLE11-SP1.orig/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
+++ linux-2.6.32-SLE11-SP1/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
@@ -487,15 +487,14 @@ _request_firmware(const struct firmware 
 	     builtin++) {
 		if (strcmp(name, builtin->name))
 			continue;
-		dev_info(device, "firmware: using built-in firmware %s\n",
-			 name);
+		dev_dbg(device, "firmware: using built-in firmware %s\n", name);
 		firmware->size = builtin->size;
 		firmware->data = builtin->data;
 		return 0;
 	}
 
 	if (uevent)
-		dev_info(device, "firmware: requesting %s\n", name);
+		dev_dbg(device, "firmware: requesting %s\n", name);
 
 	retval = fw_setup_device(firmware, &f_dev, name, device, uevent);
 	if (retval)

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] Driver core: Reduce the level of request_firmware() messages
  2010-02-27 20:43 [PATCH] Driver core: Reduce the level of request_firmware() messages Rafael J. Wysocki
@ 2010-02-28  3:13 ` Greg KH
  2010-02-28  4:43 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Greg KH @ 2010-02-28  3:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Rafael J. Wysocki; +Cc: LKML, Andrew Morton

On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 09:43:22PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> 
> The messages from _request_firmware() informing that firmware is
> being requested or built-in firmware is going to be used are printed
> at KERN_INFO, which produces lots of noise on systems with huge
> numbers of AMD CPUs.  Reduce the level of these messages to
> KERN_DEBUG to get rid of that noise.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>

Looks good, I'll queue it up on Tuesday.

thanks,

greg k-h

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] Driver core: Reduce the level of request_firmware()  messages
  2010-02-27 20:43 [PATCH] Driver core: Reduce the level of request_firmware() messages Rafael J. Wysocki
  2010-02-28  3:13 ` Greg KH
@ 2010-02-28  4:43 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
  2010-02-28 12:13   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Jaswinder Singh Rajput @ 2010-02-28  4:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Rafael J. Wysocki; +Cc: Greg KH, LKML, Andrew Morton, David Woodhouse

Hello Rafael,

On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 2:13 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
>
> The messages from _request_firmware() informing that firmware is
> being requested or built-in firmware is going to be used are printed
> at KERN_INFO, which produces lots of noise on systems with huge
> numbers of AMD CPUs.  Reduce the level of these messages to
> KERN_DEBUG to get rid of that noise.
>

Which firmware we are using is very useful information. Because of
huge numbers of CPUs it seems noise then better provide the
information for first cpu and for the rest of the CPUs you can show by
KERN_DEBUG.

Thanks,
--
Jaswinder Singh.

> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> ---
>  drivers/base/firmware_class.c |    5 ++---
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> Index: linux-2.6.32-SLE11-SP1/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.32-SLE11-SP1.orig/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
> +++ linux-2.6.32-SLE11-SP1/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
> @@ -487,15 +487,14 @@ _request_firmware(const struct firmware
>             builtin++) {
>                if (strcmp(name, builtin->name))
>                        continue;
> -               dev_info(device, "firmware: using built-in firmware %s\n",
> -                        name);
> +               dev_dbg(device, "firmware: using built-in firmware %s\n", name);
>                firmware->size = builtin->size;
>                firmware->data = builtin->data;
>                return 0;
>        }
>
>        if (uevent)
> -               dev_info(device, "firmware: requesting %s\n", name);
> +               dev_dbg(device, "firmware: requesting %s\n", name);
>
>        retval = fw_setup_device(firmware, &f_dev, name, device, uevent);
>        if (retval)
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] Driver core: Reduce the level of request_firmware() messages
  2010-02-28  4:43 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
@ 2010-02-28 12:13   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
  2010-02-28 16:33     ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2010-02-28 12:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jaswinder Singh Rajput; +Cc: Greg KH, LKML, Andrew Morton, David Woodhouse

On Sunday 28 February 2010, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> Hello Rafael,
> 
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 2:13 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> >
> > The messages from _request_firmware() informing that firmware is
> > being requested or built-in firmware is going to be used are printed
> > at KERN_INFO, which produces lots of noise on systems with huge
> > numbers of AMD CPUs.  Reduce the level of these messages to
> > KERN_DEBUG to get rid of that noise.
> >
> 
> Which firmware we are using is very useful information. Because of
> huge numbers of CPUs it seems noise then better provide the
> information for first cpu and for the rest of the CPUs you can show by
> KERN_DEBUG.

That would have been better indeed, but the problem is _request_firmware()
doesn't allow us to change the level of its messages on demand.

Rafael

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] Driver core: Reduce the level of request_firmware() messages
  2010-02-28 12:13   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
@ 2010-02-28 16:33     ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
  2010-02-28 19:54       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Jaswinder Singh Rajput @ 2010-02-28 16:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Rafael J. Wysocki; +Cc: Greg KH, LKML, Andrew Morton, David Woodhouse

Hello Rafael,

On Sun, 2010-02-28 at 13:13 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Sunday 28 February 2010, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 2:13 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> > >
> > > The messages from _request_firmware() informing that firmware is
> > > being requested or built-in firmware is going to be used are printed
> > > at KERN_INFO, which produces lots of noise on systems with huge
> > > numbers of AMD CPUs.  Reduce the level of these messages to
> > > KERN_DEBUG to get rid of that noise.
> > >
> > 
> > Which firmware we are using is very useful information. Because of
> > huge numbers of CPUs it seems noise then better provide the
> > information for first cpu and for the rest of the CPUs you can show by
> > KERN_DEBUG.
> 
> That would have been better indeed, but the problem is _request_firmware()
> doesn't allow us to change the level of its messages on demand.

Can we try this :

	if (smp_processor_id())
		dev_dbg(..);
	else
		dev_info(..);

Thanks,
--
Jaswinder Singh.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] Driver core: Reduce the level of request_firmware() messages
  2010-02-28 16:33     ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
@ 2010-02-28 19:54       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
  2010-02-28 20:13         ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2010-02-28 19:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jaswinder Singh Rajput; +Cc: Greg KH, LKML, Andrew Morton, David Woodhouse

On Sunday 28 February 2010, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> Hello Rafael,
> 
> On Sun, 2010-02-28 at 13:13 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Sunday 28 February 2010, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> > > On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 2:13 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> > > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> > > >
> > > > The messages from _request_firmware() informing that firmware is
> > > > being requested or built-in firmware is going to be used are printed
> > > > at KERN_INFO, which produces lots of noise on systems with huge
> > > > numbers of AMD CPUs.  Reduce the level of these messages to
> > > > KERN_DEBUG to get rid of that noise.
> > > >
> > > 
> > > Which firmware we are using is very useful information. Because of
> > > huge numbers of CPUs it seems noise then better provide the
> > > information for first cpu and for the rest of the CPUs you can show by
> > > KERN_DEBUG.
> > 
> > That would have been better indeed, but the problem is _request_firmware()
> > doesn't allow us to change the level of its messages on demand.
> 
> Can we try this :
> 
> 	if (smp_processor_id())
> 		dev_dbg(..);
> 	else
> 		dev_info(..);

Well, it doesn't look particularly nice, does it?

Besides, say we're requesting firmware for a non-CPU device which happens
to run on CPU1.  Then, dev_dbg() will be used, which most likely is not what we
want.

Rafael

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] Driver core: Reduce the level of request_firmware()  messages
  2010-02-28 19:54       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
@ 2010-02-28 20:13         ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
  2010-03-15 20:16           ` Greg KH
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Jaswinder Singh Rajput @ 2010-02-28 20:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Rafael J. Wysocki; +Cc: Greg KH, LKML, Andrew Morton, David Woodhouse

Hello Rafael,

On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 1:24 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> On Sunday 28 February 2010, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 2010-02-28 at 13:13 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> > On Sunday 28 February 2010, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
>> > > On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 2:13 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
>> > > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
>> > > >
>> > > > The messages from _request_firmware() informing that firmware is
>> > > > being requested or built-in firmware is going to be used are printed
>> > > > at KERN_INFO, which produces lots of noise on systems with huge
>> > > > numbers of AMD CPUs.  Reduce the level of these messages to
>> > > > KERN_DEBUG to get rid of that noise.
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > Which firmware we are using is very useful information. Because of
>> > > huge numbers of CPUs it seems noise then better provide the
>> > > information for first cpu and for the rest of the CPUs you can show by
>> > > KERN_DEBUG.
>> >
>> > That would have been better indeed, but the problem is _request_firmware()
>> > doesn't allow us to change the level of its messages on demand.
>>
>> Can we try this :
>>
>>       if (smp_processor_id())
>>               dev_dbg(..);
>>       else
>>               dev_info(..);
>
> Well, it doesn't look particularly nice, does it?
>
> Besides, say we're requesting firmware for a non-CPU device which happens
> to run on CPU1.  Then, dev_dbg() will be used, which most likely is not what we
> want.
>

Yes, you are right. But atleast can you try it once and show the
output with and without this.

Thanks,
--
Jaswinder.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] Driver core: Reduce the level of request_firmware() messages
  2010-02-28 20:13         ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
@ 2010-03-15 20:16           ` Greg KH
  2010-03-15 21:27             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Greg KH @ 2010-03-15 20:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jaswinder Singh Rajput
  Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki, Greg KH, LKML, Andrew Morton, David Woodhouse

On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 01:43:54AM +0530, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> Hello Rafael,
> 
> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 1:24 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> > On Sunday 28 February 2010, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sun, 2010-02-28 at 13:13 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >> > On Sunday 28 February 2010, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> >> > > On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 2:13 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> >> > > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> >> > > >
> >> > > > The messages from _request_firmware() informing that firmware is
> >> > > > being requested or built-in firmware is going to be used are printed
> >> > > > at KERN_INFO, which produces lots of noise on systems with huge
> >> > > > numbers of AMD CPUs.  Reduce the level of these messages to
> >> > > > KERN_DEBUG to get rid of that noise.
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Which firmware we are using is very useful information. Because of
> >> > > huge numbers of CPUs it seems noise then better provide the
> >> > > information for first cpu and for the rest of the CPUs you can show by
> >> > > KERN_DEBUG.
> >> >
> >> > That would have been better indeed, but the problem is _request_firmware()
> >> > doesn't allow us to change the level of its messages on demand.
> >>
> >> Can we try this :
> >>
> >>       if (smp_processor_id())
> >>               dev_dbg(..);
> >>       else
> >>               dev_info(..);
> >
> > Well, it doesn't look particularly nice, does it?
> >
> > Besides, say we're requesting firmware for a non-CPU device which happens
> > to run on CPU1.  Then, dev_dbg() will be used, which most likely is not what we
> > want.
> >
> 
> Yes, you are right. But atleast can you try it once and show the
> output with and without this.

Was there ever a resolution to this?  Rafael, do you want me to apply
your original patch now?

thanks,

greg k-h

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] Driver core: Reduce the level of request_firmware() messages
  2010-03-15 20:16           ` Greg KH
@ 2010-03-15 21:27             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
  2010-03-15 23:34               ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2010-03-15 21:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Greg KH
  Cc: Jaswinder Singh Rajput, Greg KH, LKML, Andrew Morton,
	David Woodhouse

On Monday 15 March 2010, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 01:43:54AM +0530, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> > Hello Rafael,
> > 
> > On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 1:24 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> > > On Sunday 28 February 2010, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Sun, 2010-02-28 at 13:13 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > >> > On Sunday 28 February 2010, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> > >> > > On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 2:13 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> > >> > > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > The messages from _request_firmware() informing that firmware is
> > >> > > > being requested or built-in firmware is going to be used are printed
> > >> > > > at KERN_INFO, which produces lots of noise on systems with huge
> > >> > > > numbers of AMD CPUs.  Reduce the level of these messages to
> > >> > > > KERN_DEBUG to get rid of that noise.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Which firmware we are using is very useful information. Because of
> > >> > > huge numbers of CPUs it seems noise then better provide the
> > >> > > information for first cpu and for the rest of the CPUs you can show by
> > >> > > KERN_DEBUG.
> > >> >
> > >> > That would have been better indeed, but the problem is _request_firmware()
> > >> > doesn't allow us to change the level of its messages on demand.
> > >>
> > >> Can we try this :
> > >>
> > >>       if (smp_processor_id())
> > >>               dev_dbg(..);
> > >>       else
> > >>               dev_info(..);
> > >
> > > Well, it doesn't look particularly nice, does it?
> > >
> > > Besides, say we're requesting firmware for a non-CPU device which happens
> > > to run on CPU1.  Then, dev_dbg() will be used, which most likely is not what we
> > > want.
> > >
> > 
> > Yes, you are right. But atleast can you try it once and show the
> > output with and without this.
> 
> Was there ever a resolution to this?

Nope.

> Rafael, do you want me to apply your original patch now?

I still think it's a good idea.  The information about what firmware is being
used doesn't seem to be very useful for anything but debugging, so I think
KERN_DEBUG is actually the right level for these messages.

Rafael

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] Driver core: Reduce the level of request_firmware()  messages
  2010-03-15 21:27             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
@ 2010-03-15 23:34               ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
  2010-03-15 23:40                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
  2010-03-15 23:44                 ` Greg KH
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Jaswinder Singh Rajput @ 2010-03-15 23:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Rafael J. Wysocki; +Cc: Greg KH, Greg KH, LKML, Andrew Morton, David Woodhouse

Hello Rafael,

On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 2:57 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
>
> I still think it's a good idea.  The information about what firmware is being
> used doesn't seem to be very useful for anything but debugging, so I think
> KERN_DEBUG is actually the right level for these messages.
>

Can we use printk_once()

Thanks,
--
Jaswinder Singh.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] Driver core: Reduce the level of request_firmware() messages
  2010-03-15 23:34               ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
@ 2010-03-15 23:40                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
  2010-03-15 23:55                   ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
  2010-03-15 23:44                 ` Greg KH
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2010-03-15 23:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jaswinder Singh Rajput
  Cc: Greg KH, Greg KH, LKML, Andrew Morton, David Woodhouse

On Tuesday 16 March 2010, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> Hello Rafael,
> 
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 2:57 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> >
> > I still think it's a good idea.  The information about what firmware is being
> > used doesn't seem to be very useful for anything but debugging, so I think
> > KERN_DEBUG is actually the right level for these messages.
> >
> 
> Can we use printk_once()

Yes, I guess so.

OK, I'll rework the patch.

Thanks,
Rafael

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] Driver core: Reduce the level of request_firmware() messages
  2010-03-15 23:34               ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
  2010-03-15 23:40                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
@ 2010-03-15 23:44                 ` Greg KH
  2010-03-16  0:17                   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Greg KH @ 2010-03-15 23:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jaswinder Singh Rajput
  Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki, Greg KH, LKML, Andrew Morton, David Woodhouse

On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 05:04:09AM +0530, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> Hello Rafael,
> 
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 2:57 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> >
> > I still think it's a good idea.  The information about what firmware is being
> > used doesn't seem to be very useful for anything but debugging, so I think
> > KERN_DEBUG is actually the right level for these messages.
> >
> 
> Can we use printk_once()

No, I'd rather use dev_dbg() that way we can dynamically turn it on and
off as needed.  I took Rafael's original patch.

Funny thing is, someone else also sent the same patch, so there must be
others wanting this change :)

thanks,

greg k-h

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] Driver core: Reduce the level of request_firmware()  messages
  2010-03-15 23:40                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
@ 2010-03-15 23:55                   ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Jaswinder Singh Rajput @ 2010-03-15 23:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Rafael J. Wysocki; +Cc: Greg KH, Greg KH, LKML, Andrew Morton, David Woodhouse

Hello Rafael,

On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 5:10 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> On Tuesday 16 March 2010, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
>> Hello Rafael,
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 2:57 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
>> >
>> > I still think it's a good idea.  The information about what firmware is being
>> > used doesn't seem to be very useful for anything but debugging, so I think
>> > KERN_DEBUG is actually the right level for these messages.
>> >
>>
>> Can we use printk_once()
>
> Yes, I guess so.
>
> OK, I'll rework the patch.
>

Good, so you need to prepare printk_once() with condition like in our
case so that it prints once for a particular name.

Thanks,
--
Jaswinder Singh.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] Driver core: Reduce the level of request_firmware() messages
  2010-03-15 23:44                 ` Greg KH
@ 2010-03-16  0:17                   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2010-03-16  0:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Greg KH
  Cc: Jaswinder Singh Rajput, Greg KH, LKML, Andrew Morton,
	David Woodhouse

On Tuesday 16 March 2010, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 05:04:09AM +0530, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> > Hello Rafael,
> > 
> > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 2:57 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> > >
> > > I still think it's a good idea.  The information about what firmware is being
> > > used doesn't seem to be very useful for anything but debugging, so I think
> > > KERN_DEBUG is actually the right level for these messages.
> > >
> > 
> > Can we use printk_once()
> 
> No, I'd rather use dev_dbg() that way we can dynamically turn it on and
> off as needed.  I took Rafael's original patch.

OK, thanks!

> Funny thing is, someone else also sent the same patch, so there must be
> others wanting this change :)

I know SGI wants it at least.

Rafael

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2010-03-16  0:15 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-02-27 20:43 [PATCH] Driver core: Reduce the level of request_firmware() messages Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-28  3:13 ` Greg KH
2010-02-28  4:43 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2010-02-28 12:13   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-28 16:33     ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2010-02-28 19:54       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-28 20:13         ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2010-03-15 20:16           ` Greg KH
2010-03-15 21:27             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-03-15 23:34               ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2010-03-15 23:40                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-03-15 23:55                   ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2010-03-15 23:44                 ` Greg KH
2010-03-16  0:17                   ` Rafael J. Wysocki

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox