From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "John W. Linville" Subject: Re: [PATCH] bcm43xx: fix unexpected LED control values in BCM4303 sprom Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 08:12:53 -0500 Message-ID: <20061101131246.GA21668@tuxdriver.com> References: <4535AFC2.mail3S81JGSDJ@lwfinger.net> <200610181637.08698.mb@bu3sch.de> <20061101034936.GD9309@tuxdriver.com> <454823CC.9070808@lwfinger.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Bcm43xx-dev-0fE9KPoRgkgATYTw5x5z8w@public.gmane.org, Michael Buesch , Stefano Brivio Return-path: To: Larry Finger Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <454823CC.9070808-tQ5ms3gMjBLk1uMJSBkQmQ@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: bcm43xx-dev-bounces-0fE9KPoRgkgATYTw5x5z8w@public.gmane.org Errors-To: bcm43xx-dev-bounces-0fE9KPoRgkgATYTw5x5z8w@public.gmane.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 10:34:20PM -0600, Larry Finger wrote: > John W. Linville wrote: > >On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 04:37:08PM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote: > > > >>>@@ -257,7 +263,11 @@ void bcm43xx_leds_update(struct bcm43xx_ > >>> continue; > >>> #endif /* CONFIG_BCM43XX_DEBUG */ > >>> default: > >>>- assert(0); > >>>+ if (bcm43xx_max_led_err) { > >>>+ printkl(KERN_INFO PFX "Bad value in > >>>leds_update," > >>>+ " led->behaviour: 0x%x\n", > >>>led->behaviour); > >>>+ --bcm43xx_max_led_err; > >>>+ } > >>I'd call this message bloat. ;) This is the first time the assertion > >>triggers since it was added. > >>You could instead remove the assert(), remove bcm43xx_max_led_err > >>and use dprintkl instead of printkl. > > I disagree with part of Michael's comments. I think we should have a > dprintk, rather than dprintkl, so that we get printouts from all four of > the sprom values. That way the user will be able to report the numbers we > need. As this would not limit the log entries and potentially generate > thousands, there should be a variable like bcm43xx_max_led_err to limit the > number of log entries. > > I will propose a new patch once I get the data for the second case. In the > meantime, the patch you have pushed upstream will fix the BCM4303 led > assertions. OK, cool. I'm happy for you to send another patch. John -- John W. Linville linville-2XuSBdqkA4R54TAoqtyWWQ@public.gmane.org