On Mon, 18 Oct 2021 10:08:30 +0200, Cezary Rojewski wrote: > > On 2021-10-17 9:52 AM, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > On Fri, 15 Oct 2021 18:42:33 +0200, > > Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: > >> On 10/15/21 11:40 AM, Cezary Rojewski wrote: > >>> From: Amadeusz Sławiński <amadeuszx.slawinski@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >>> ACPI is device independent, so printing warnings using device functions > >>> is misleading. Replace dev_xxx() with pr_xxx() and remove now > >>> unnecessary argument. > >> > >> the routines in sound/hda/intel-nhtl.c are called from a specific PCI > >> device, why would you remove that information? > >> > >> This makes no sense to me. > > > > Right, otherwise this change would confuse user, too; they'll be > > clueless about who triggers it. > > > > It's OK to change to pr_*(), but then it should have more information > > that can be easily identified and understood what user should do. > > Isn't the answer as to 'who' used it obvious, though? NHLT is used for > I2S and DMIC endpoints only, so the question is 'limited' in the first > place. And then, you cannot have several Intel ADSP drivers running > simultaneously. Well, it's not about you or devs -- those must know which driver is relevant very well, of course. Instead, the problem is for *all* others who read the message. IOW, which user would know and think "hey, it's a NHLT thingy that must be ASoC xxx driver that spewed" only from the text snippet "NHLT table not found"? That's way too much expectation. Some more guidance is needed in the error message. The dev_*() variant gave at least the device names that can help guessing the relevant driver easily. > Also, logs found ACPI-table interface are device-less so this patch > makes NHLT interface look more ACPI-generic alike. The conversion itself is no problem, but the lost information is the problem. Takashi
