Thomas Renninger wrote:
On Saturday 24 October 2009 05:29:47 am Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Fri, 2009-10-23 at 18:37 -0500, Mike Travis wrote:
plain text document attachment (limit_acpi)
Limit number of ACPI messages of the form:
[ 0.000000] ACPI: LSAPIC (acpi_id[0x00] lsapic_id[0x00]
lsapic_eid[0x00] enabled)
[ 99.638655] processor ACPI0007:00: registered as cooling_device0
Cc: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Len Brown <lenb@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Thomas Renninger <trenn@xxxxxxx>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@xxxxxx>
Cc: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Myron Stowe <myron.stowe@xxxxxx>
Cc: Feng Tang <feng.tang@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: linux-acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Mike Travis <travis@xxxxxxx>
---
drivers/acpi/fan.c | 7 ++++++-
drivers/acpi/processor_core.c | 8 ++++++--
drivers/acpi/tables.c | 15 ++++++++++-----
3 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
--- linux.orig/drivers/acpi/fan.c
+++ linux/drivers/acpi/fan.c
@@ -243,6 +243,7 @@
int result = 0;
int state = 0;
struct thermal_cooling_device *cdev;
+ static int msgcnt;
if (!device)
return -EINVAL;
@@ -267,7 +268,11 @@
goto end;
}
- dev_info(&device->dev, "registered as cooling_device%d\n", cdev->id);
+ if (msgcnt < 4 || !limit_console_output(false)) {
+ dev_info(&device->dev,
+ "registered as cooling_device%d\n", cdev->id);
+ msgcnt++;
+ }
I'm personally not in favor of printing some, but not all, of these
messages. That leads to questions when analyzing a dmesg log, such as
"Hmm, I see I have 64 CPUs, but only 0-3 are registered as cooling
devices. Does that mean something is wrong?"
But I would be glad to see this particular message removed completely.
device->driver_data = cdev;
result = sysfs_create_link(&device->dev.kobj,
--- linux.orig/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c
+++ linux/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c
@@ -775,6 +775,7 @@
struct acpi_processor *pr = NULL;
int result = 0;
struct sys_device *sysdev;
+ static int msgcnt;
pr = kzalloc(sizeof(struct acpi_processor), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!pr)
@@ -845,8 +846,11 @@
goto err_power_exit;
}
- dev_info(&device->dev, "registered as cooling_device%d\n",
- pr->cdev->id);
+ if (msgcnt < 4 || !limit_console_output(false)) {
+ dev_info(&device->dev, "registered as cooling_device%d\n",
+ pr->cdev->id);
+ msgcnt++;
+ }
If Zhang Rui does not complain you can change these:
..registered as cooling_device..
into dev_dbg() without any condition.
This isn't critical.
Or why not use the more fine grained
ACPI debug facility and change it into:
ACPI_DEBUG_PRINT((ACPI_DB_INFO "..."));
(compare with Documentation/acpi/debug.txt and other
occurences in the same file)
You have to pass:
acpi_dbg_layer=0x20000000
to see it then.
Ok.
result = sysfs_create_link(&device->dev.kobj,
&pr->cdev->device.kobj,
--- linux.orig/drivers/acpi/tables.c
+++ linux/drivers/acpi/tables.c
@@ -170,11 +170,16 @@
case ACPI_MADT_TYPE_LOCAL_SAPIC:
{
struct acpi_madt_local_sapic *p =
- (struct acpi_madt_local_sapic *)header;
- printk(KERN_INFO PREFIX
- "LSAPIC (acpi_id[0x%02x] lsapic_id[0x%02x] lsapic_eid[0x%02x]
%s)\n", - p->processor_id, p->id, p->eid,
- (p->lapic_flags & ACPI_MADT_ENABLED) ? "enabled" :
"disabled"); + (struct acpi_madt_local_sapic *)header;
+
+ if (p->eid < 8 || !limit_console_output(false))
I can't find limit_console_output(), I expect it got introduced by another one
of your patch series, not send to the acpi list?
Still shouldn't this be:
limit_console_output(true)
instead of:
!limit_console_output(false)
Thomas
Sorry, I used a semi-auto method of calling get_maintainer which filled each patch
with specific Cc's. I did send the first one to everyone in hopes that that would
help find the others.
See http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=125634109621411&w=4 (the argument specifies
whether to reduce the console loglevel. It's currently only used to suppress the
cpu bootup messages.)
Thanks,
Mike
+ printk(KERN_INFO PREFIX
+ "LSAPIC (acpi_id[0x%02x] "
+ "lsapic_id[0x%02x] "
+ "lsapic_eid[0x%02x] %s)\n",
+ p->processor_id, p->id, p->eid,
+ (p->lapic_flags & ACPI_MADT_ENABLED) ?
+ "enabled" : "disabled");
I know we print way too much stuff for every processor, but again, I'd
rather see all CPUs or none. I think there's a little more value in
this one than the cooling device one (probably because I do a lot of
platform bringup), but it could certainly be made KERN_DEBUG and/or
combined with another processor discovery line.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
