Hello Uwe,
On 2024-06-23 11:46, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
On 6/23/24 09:00, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 23/06/2024 05:33, Daniel Golle wrote:
+
+ pm_runtime_set_autosuspend_delay(dev, RK_RNG_AUTOSUSPEND_DELAY);
+ pm_runtime_use_autosuspend(dev);
+ devm_pm_runtime_enable(dev);
+
+ ret = devm_hwrng_register(dev, &rk_rng->rng);
+ if (ret)
+ return dev_err_probe(&pdev->dev, ret, "Failed to register Rockchip
hwrng\n");
+
+ dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "Registered Rockchip hwrng\n");
Drop, it is not useful at all. Srsly, we had already long enough talk,
[...]
And in this long talk using dev_dbg() was one of the suggestions for a
compromise. For me this is ok.
There is no single benefit of such debug statement. sysfs already
provides you this information. Simple entry/exit is provided by
tracing. You duplicate existing interfaces without any benefit,
because
this prints nothing more.
There might be a (small) value if you want to know when during boot
the device becomes available. So having a dev_dbg() that can be
enabled dynamically (assuming DYNAMIC_DEBUG=y) and isn't in the way
otherwise might be justified. IMHO a dev_dbg is lightweight enough
that *I* won't continue the discussion.
For anyone interested, below is an example that shows the usability
of knowing when a device becomes available:
https://gitlab.manjaro.org/manjaro-arm/packages/core/linux/-/issues/21
