From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757716AbcFAJe5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jun 2016 05:34:57 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:36345 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753885AbcFAJez (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jun 2016 05:34:55 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] coresight: Add better messages for coresight_timeout To: Joe Perches , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org References: <1464695858-29284-1-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com> <1464695858-29284-5-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com> <1464717537.14627.39.camel@perches.com> Cc: mathieu.poirier@linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Suzuki K Poulose Message-ID: <574EAC3C.5040504@arm.com> Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 10:34:52 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1464717537.14627.39.camel@perches.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 31/05/16 18:58, Joe Perches wrote: > On Tue, 2016-05-31 at 12:57 +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: >> When we encounter a timeout waiting for a status change via >> coresight_timeout, the caller always print the offset which >> was tried. This is pretty much useless as it doesn't specify >> the bit position we wait for. Also, one needs to lookup the >> TRM to figure out, what was wrong. This patch changes all >> such error messages to print something more meaningful. > > trivia: > > Perhaps consistently using > dev_err(dev, "timeout while waiting for %s\n", ""); > could make the object code a bit smaller. > >> diff --git a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etb10.c b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etb10.c > [] >> @@ -184,8 +184,7 @@ static void etb_disable_hw(struct etb_drvdata *drvdata) >> >> if (coresight_timeout(drvdata->base, ETB_FFCR, ETB_FFCR_BIT, 0)) { >> dev_err(drvdata->dev, >> - "timeout observed when probing at offset %#x\n", >> - ETB_FFCR); >> + "timeout while waiting for completion of Manual Flush\n"); > > ie: > dev_err(drvdata->dev, > "timeout while waiting for %s\n", > "completion of Manual Flush"); > > but that depends on how many of these coresight > files are compiled and linked. Or we could move the timeout message to coresight_timeout(). The only disadvantage is if a caller is OK with silent timeouts. How about : int coresight_timeout(void *base, u32 offset, u32 bit, u32 val, char *info) where the message can be suppressed if info == NULL ? Mathieu, your thoughts ? > > There is a while/when usage difference in some of > the output messages. Right, I will fix them. This was a merged version of individual patches, hence the changes. Cheers Suzuki