Felipe Balbi had written, on 12/09/2009 05:23 PM, the following:
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:15:26AM +0100, ext Kevin Hilman wrote:
Tero Kristo <tero.kristo@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
From: Tero Kristo <tero.kristo@xxxxxxxxx>
Current warning messages will be constantly printed out during normal operation
if smartreflex autocompensation is disabled.
Signed-off-by: Tero Kristo <tero.kristo@xxxxxxxxx>
Agreed that these warnings are spam, but I think they should be
replaced by some one-time warning so at least there's a hint someplace
that SR is not actually being done on a platfrom.
well, there's printk_once()
include/linux/kernel.h:
250 /*
251 * Print a one-time message (analogous to WARN_ONCE() et al):
252 */
253 #define printk_once(x...) ({ \
254 static bool __print_once = true; \
255 \
256 if (__print_once) { \
257 __print_once = false; \
258 printk(x); \
259 } \
260 })
and WARN_ONCE()
include/asm-generic/bug.h:
125 #define WARN_ONCE(condition, format...) ({ \
126 static int __warned; \
127 int __ret_warn_once = !!(condition); \
128 \
129 if (unlikely(__ret_warn_once)) \
130 if (WARN(!__warned, format)) \
131 __warned = 1; \
132 unlikely(__ret_warn_once); \
133 })
I guess printk_once() is better.
But what is the point in having it?
situation 1:
sr_start_vddautocomap() gets called for starting AVS while dvfs. The
spam message just warns user that autocomp is not set when OPP change
happens.
case 1 against printing it:
If the user had disabled vddautocomp, then the warnings have no rational
in warning the user which he/she already knows about.
case 2 against printing it using printk_once:
situation x:
step 1: autocomp disabled, dvfs transitions -> printk_once will print
only once.
step 2: autocomp enabled, dvfs transitions - no prints.
step 3: autocomp disabled, dvfs - we wont see prints :(
Agreed, we could have an equivalent implementation using a static bool
instead of using printk_once .. still a nuisance message which does not
provide additional info.. other than adding a latency overhead.
situation 2:
when attempting to enable SR when nvalues are not present (e.g. on
3530/3430 es3.0).. here the return value should be used and is more
informative and usable from a application perspective..
just my 2 cents..
--
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
