public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>
To: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,  Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>,
	 Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>,
	 Li Zetao <lizetao1@huawei.com>,
	linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wlcore: sdio: warn only once for wl12xx_sdio_raw_{read,write}() failures
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 22:58:18 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8734tdaal1.fsf@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240227002059.379267-1-javierm@redhat.com> (Javier Martinez Canillas's message of "Tue, 27 Feb 2024 01:20:46 +0100")

Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com> writes:

> Report these failures only once, instead of keep logging the warnings for
> the same condition every time that a SDIO read or write is attempted. This
> behaviour is spammy and unnecessarily pollutes the kernel log buffer.

Removing error messages is not usually a good idea, it would be much
better to fix the root cause.

> For example, on an AM625 BeaglePlay board where accessing a SDIO WiFi chip
> fails with an -110 error:
>
>   $ dmesg | grep "sdio write\|read failed (-110)" | wc -l
>   39

-110 is -ETIMEDOUT. Why is it timing out?

> Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>
> ---
>
>  drivers/net/wireless/ti/wlcore/sdio.c | 8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ti/wlcore/sdio.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ti/wlcore/sdio.c
> index eb5482ed76ae..47ecf33a0fbe 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ti/wlcore/sdio.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ti/wlcore/sdio.c
> @@ -75,8 +75,8 @@ static int __must_check wl12xx_sdio_raw_read(struct device *child, int addr,
>  
>  	sdio_release_host(func);
>  
> -	if (WARN_ON(ret))
> -		dev_err(child->parent, "sdio read failed (%d)\n", ret);
> +	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(ret))
> +		dev_err_once(child->parent, "sdio read failed (%d)\n", ret);

WARN_ON() feels excessive here, maybe remove that entirely? But
dev_err_ratelimited() feels more approriate than printing the error just
once.

-- 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches

  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-02-27 20:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-02-27  0:20 [PATCH] wlcore: sdio: warn only once for wl12xx_sdio_raw_{read,write}() failures Javier Martinez Canillas
2024-02-27 11:29 ` Breno Leitao
2024-02-27 20:58 ` Kalle Valo [this message]
2024-02-28  8:24   ` Javier Martinez Canillas

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=8734tdaal1.fsf@kernel.org \
    --to=kvalo@kernel.org \
    --cc=javierm@redhat.com \
    --cc=leitao@debian.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lizetao1@huawei.com \
    --cc=nm@ti.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox