Le 09/08/2022 à 18:20, Jason Gunthorpe a écrit :
On Sat, Aug 06, 2022 at 09:56:13PM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
L and S are swapped/
s/VFIO_FLS_MC/VFIO_FSL_MC/
Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
All the dev_ logging functions in the file have the "VFIO_FSL_MC: "
prefix.
As they are dev_ function, the driver should already be displayed.
So, does it make sense or could they be all removed?
---
drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc.c b/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc.c
index 3feff729f3ce..66d01db1d240 100644
--- a/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc.c
+++ b/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc.c
@@ -110,7 +110,7 @@ static void vfio_fsl_mc_close_device(struct vfio_device *core_vdev)
if (WARN_ON(ret))
dev_warn(&mc_cont->dev,
- "VFIO_FLS_MC: reset device has failed (%d)\n", ret);
+ "VFIO_FSL_MC: reset device has failed (%d)\n", ret);
WARN_ON already prints, this is better written as
WARN(ret, "VFIO_FSL_MC: reset device has failed (%d)\n", ret);
Or maybe, just:
if (ret)
dev_warn(&mc_cont->dev,
"VFIO_FSL_MC: reset device has failed (%d)\n", ret);
This keep information about the device, avoid the duplicate printing
related to WARN_ON+dev_warn and is more in line with error handling in
other files.
Do you agree or do you prefer a v2 as you proposed with WARN()?
CJ
Jason
