On 24-03-01, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 11:47:21AM +0100, Marco Felsch wrote:
> > Drivers like the tcpm.c do search for a remote endpoint on different
> > places to be dt-bindings compatible. The search is done on the device
> > itself or on the child fwnode in case it was not found the first time.
> >
> > This indicates that not finding the remote endpoint at the first try is
> > a valid use-case and should not cause an error printing.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Marco Felsch <m.felsch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm not 100% certain if this is the correct place but if our platform
> > follows the dt-bindings we receive
> >
> > | OF: graph: no port node found in /soc@0/bus@30800000/i2c@30a30000/tcpc@50
> >
> > a few times because of the below pr_err() and EPROBE_DEFER.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Marco
> >
> > drivers/of/property.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/of/property.c b/drivers/of/property.c
> > index 641a40cf5cf3..155df04a9512 100644
> > --- a/drivers/of/property.c
> > +++ b/drivers/of/property.c
> > @@ -665,7 +665,7 @@ struct device_node *of_graph_get_next_endpoint(const struct device_node *parent,
> > of_node_put(node);
> >
> > if (!port) {
> > - pr_err("graph: no port node found in %pOF\n", parent);
> > + pr_notice("graph: no port node found in %pOF\n", parent);
>
> Already changed to pr_debug.
Ah.. didn't noticed that albeit I was sitting on rc4 while preparing
this patch. Thanks for the info :)
Regards,
Marco
>
> Rob
>
