Hi David, dregan@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on Tue, 23 Jan 2024 19:04:57 -0800: > Update log level messages so that more critical messages > can be seen. > > Signed-off-by: David Regan <dregan@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Reviewed-by: William Zhang <william.zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > Changes in v3: None > --- > Changes in v2: > - Added to patch series > --- > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/brcmnand/brcmnand.c | 6 +++--- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/brcmnand/brcmnand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/brcmnand/brcmnand.c > index 6b5d76eff0ec..a4e311b6798c 100644 > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/brcmnand/brcmnand.c > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/brcmnand/brcmnand.c > @@ -1143,7 +1143,7 @@ static int bcmnand_ctrl_poll_status(struct brcmnand_host *host, > if ((val & mask) == expected_val) > return 0; > > - dev_warn(ctrl->dev, "timeout on status poll (expected %x got %x)\n", > + dev_err(ctrl->dev, "timeout on status poll (expected %x got %x)\n", I don't see the point but if you want. > expected_val, val & mask); > > return -ETIMEDOUT; > @@ -2196,7 +2196,7 @@ static int brcmnand_read(struct mtd_info *mtd, struct nand_chip *chip, > return err; > } > > - dev_dbg(ctrl->dev, "uncorrectable error at 0x%llx\n", > + dev_err(ctrl->dev, "uncorrectable error at 0x%llx\n", Upper layer will complain, you can keep this at the debug level. > (unsigned long long)err_addr); > mtd->ecc_stats.failed++; > /* NAND layer expects zero on ECC errors */ > @@ -2211,7 +2211,7 @@ static int brcmnand_read(struct mtd_info *mtd, struct nand_chip *chip, > err = brcmnand_read_by_pio(mtd, chip, addr, trans, buf, > oob, &err_addr); > > - dev_dbg(ctrl->dev, "corrected error at 0x%llx\n", > + dev_info(ctrl->dev, "corrected error at 0x%llx\n", Definitely not! Way too verbose. Please keep this one as it is. > (unsigned long long)err_addr); > mtd->ecc_stats.corrected += corrected; > /* Always exceed the software-imposed threshold */ Thanks, Miquèl
