Hi Christian, On Tue, 2015-03-03 at 17:28 +-0100, Christian Ruppert wrote: +AD4- On 2015-03-03 16:27, Alexey Brodkin wrote: +AD4- +AD4- There's no point in printing error message if platform+AF8-get+AF8-irq() +AD4- +AD4- returns -EPROBE+AF8-DEFER because probe deferring subsystem already outputs +AD4- +AD4- message in bootlog like this: +AD4- +AD4- ---+AD4-8--- +AD4- +AD4- platform e001d000.i2c: Driver i2c+AF8-designware requests probe deferral +AD4- +AD4- ---+AD4-8--- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4- Moreover in case of probe deferral following message may mislead user: +AD4- +AD4- ---+AD4-8--- +AD4- +AD4- i2c+AF8-designware e001d000.i2c: no irq resource? +AD4- +AD4- ---+AD4-8--- +AD4- +AD4- even though it's expected that platform+AF8-get+AF8-irq() may return +AD4- +AD4- -EPROBE+AF8-DEFER. +AD4- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4- irq +AD0- platform+AF8-get+AF8-irq(pdev, 0)+ADs- +AD4- +AD4- if (irq +ADw- 0) +AHs- +AD4- +AD4- - dev+AF8-err(+ACY-pdev-+AD4-dev, +ACI-no irq resource?+AFw-n+ACI-)+ADs- +AD4- +AD4- +- if (irq +ACEAPQ- -EPROBE+AF8-DEFER) +AD4- +AD4- +- dev+AF8-err(+ACY-pdev-+AD4-dev, +ACI-no irq resource?+AFw-n+ACI-)+ADs- +AD4- +AD4- Presented like this I wonder if this merits being a dev+AF8-err at all. +AD4- Wouldn't dev+AF8-dbg be more adequate? This might remove the need for the +AD4- condition and also avoid bothering everyone if something in the platform +AD4- device structures or device tree is not right. +AD4- +AD4- +AD4- return irq+ADs- /+ACo- -ENXIO +ACo-/ +AD4- +AD4- +AH0- We've just had similar discussion related to DW APB UART with Andy here https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/3/3/412 So yes probably we may safely remove error message from here completely. -Alexey -- 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
