Thanks for the pointer.
But I don't like this patch. If you find a bug, make a bug report or
just fix it if you know the fix already. Or write something in IRC. Or
write on the Mailing list as a general question or something else
But I really don't agree on doing it this way. You would have needed
like the same amount of time to actual fix the problem.
Anyway, for adding a printk:
struct nvkm_subdev *subdev = &therm->subdev;
nvkm_error(subdev, "message");
2016-10-25 12:50 GMT+02:00 Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx>:
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/therm/temp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/therm/temp.c
> index b9703c0..adb1deb 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/therm/temp.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/therm/temp.c
> @@ -120,6 +120,11 @@ nvkm_therm_sensor_event(struct nvkm_therm *therm, enum nvkm_therm_thrs thrs,
> struct work_struct *work;
>
> work = kmalloc(sizeof(*work), GFP_ATOMIC);
> + /* FIXME:
> + 1) this is total overkill, orderly_poweroff() already
> + uses schedule_work internally
> + 2) it would be good to at least printk what is going on
> + */
> if (work) {
> INIT_WORK(work, nv_poweroff_work);
> schedule_work(work);
>
> GFP_ATOMIC is not reliable. Plus, see the fixme.
>
> Best regards,
> Pavel
>
> --
> (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
> (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nouveau mailing list
> Nouveau@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nouveau
>
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
