Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1411030
| From | Suzuki K Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 4/5] coresight: Add better messages for coresight_timeout |
| Date | 2016-06-01 11:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rFaN4-6FG-19@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <rEQv0-2eq-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <rEQv2-2eq-65@gated-at.bofh.it> <rEW7n-5MT-21@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
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", "<foo>");
> 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
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH 4/5] coresight: Add better messages for coresight_timeout Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com> - 2016-05-31 14:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH 4/5] coresight: Add better messages for coresight_timeout Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> - 2016-05-31 20:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH 4/5] coresight: Add better messages for coresight_timeout Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2016-05-31 20:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH 4/5] coresight: Add better messages for coresight_timeout Suzuki K Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com> - 2016-06-01 11:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH 4/5] coresight: Add better messages for coresight_timeout Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> - 2016-06-01 17:20 +0200
csiph-web