On 4/25/2016 1:48 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote: > On 04/23, Frank Rowand wrote: >> From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Failure to enable DMA by the msm_serial driver is silent. >> Add a message to report the failure. >> >> Signed-off-by: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/tty/serial/msm_serial.c | 1 + >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> Index: b/drivers/tty/serial/msm_serial.c >> =================================================================== >> --- a/drivers/tty/serial/msm_serial.c >> +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/msm_serial.c >> @@ -170,6 +170,7 @@ rel_tx: >> dma_release_channel(dma->chan); >> no_tx: >> memset(dma, 0, sizeof(*dma)); >> + dev_info(dev, "msm_serial: DMA not enabled\n"); >> } >> > > Wouldn't this print twice for TX and RX channels? I'd prefer we > not print anything when this driver probes, just because it's a > bunch of log spam that we don't really need. This is in msm_request_tx_dma(). I should have made the message "msm_serial: TX DMA not enabled\n" and added a similar message to msm_request_rx_dma(). Then it could print twice, once for TX and once for RX. :-) For my board it would print twice because both requests would fail for the same reason. Should I add it to msm_request_rx_dma() also, but make both locations dev_debug() instead of dev_info()? -Frank -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
