On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 06:59:51PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Wed, 2015-02-11 at 17:46 +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > + PUNIT_SEMAPHORE, &sem); > > > + if (ret) > > > dev_err(dev->dev, "iosf failed to read punit semaphore\n"); > > > else > > > dev_err(dev->dev, "PUNIT SEM: %d\n", sem); > > > > Shouldn't the latter be a dev_dbg? > > For me it seems not. Here is error patch and we have already in error > recovery, so, intention to see if the semaphore becomes alive after > reset. Am I right, David? Yes. We've timed out by this section of code so we want to verify the semaphore was reset. Failure to read the semaphore though is a separate error as well. Dave > > > -- > Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> > Intel Finland Oy > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
