Hi Dave,
On 8/25/20 12:36 PM, David Miller wrote:
From: Murali Karicheri <m-karicheri2@xxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 13:01:00 -0400
+ ret = cpsw_ale_del_vlan(cpsw->ale, vid, 0);
+ if (ret)
+ dev_err(priv->dev, "%s: failed %d: ret %d\n",
+ __func__, __LINE__, ret);
+ ret = cpsw_ale_del_ucast(cpsw->ale, priv->mac_addr,
+ HOST_PORT_NUM, ALE_VLAN, vid);
+ if (ret)
+ dev_err(priv->dev, "%s: failed %d: ret %d\n",
+ __func__, __LINE__, ret);
+ ret = cpsw_ale_del_mcast(cpsw->ale, priv->ndev->broadcast,
+ 0, ALE_VLAN, vid);
+ if (ret)
+ dev_err(priv->dev, "%s: failed %d: ret %d\n",
+ __func__, __LINE__, ret);
cpsw_ale_flush_multicast(cpsw->ale, ALE_PORT_HOST, vid);
These error messages are extremely unhelpful. You're calling three
different functions, yet emitting basically the same __func__ for
each of those cases. No user can send you a useful bug report
immediately if they just have func and line.
Please get rid of the "__func__" and "__line__" stuff completely, it's
never advisable to ever use that in my opinion. Instead, describe
which delete operation failed, optionally with the error return.
OK. I had considered your suggestion, but thought having a line number
would be handy for a developer. Function name would be better. Will
re-send with changes as you have suggested.
--
Murali Karicheri
Texas Instruments
