Hi Maxime,
On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 03:57:48PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 03:44:41PM +0200, Ondřej Jirman wrote:
> > >
[...]
> > > Yeah, but on the other hand, we regularly have people that come up and
> > > ask if a "legitimate" EPROBE_DEFER error message (as in: the driver
> > > wasn't there on the first attempt but was there on the second) is a
> > > cause of concern or not.
> >
> > That's why I also added a success message, to distinguish this case.
>
> That doesn't really help though. We have plenty of drivers that have
> some sort of success message and people will still ask about that error
> message earlier.
>
> > > > And people run several distros for 3-4 months without anyone noticing
> > > > any
> > > > issues and that thermal regulation doesn't work. So it seems that lack
> > > > of a
> > > > success message is not enough.
> > >
> > > I understand what the issue is, but do you really expect phone users to
> > > monitor the kernel logs every time they boot their phone to see if the
> > > thermal throttling is enabled?
> >
> > Not phone users, but people making their own kernels/distributions. Those
> > people
> > monitor dmesg, and out of 4 distros or more nobody noticed there was an
> > issue
> > (despite the complaints of overheating by their users).
> >
> > So I thought some warning may be in order, so that distro people more easily
> > notice they have misconfigured the kernel or sometging.
>
> I mean, then there's nothing we can do to properly address that then.
>
> The configuration system is a gun, we can point at the target, but
> anyone is definitely free to shot themself in the foot.
>
> You would have exactly the same result if you left the thermal driver
> disabled, or if you didn't have cpufreq support.
Right. Though I hope there's some middle ground. I mean all of those dev_err
in error paths of many drivers are there mostly to help debugging stuff.
And even though I was part of this driver's development, it took me quite
some time to figure out it was the missing sunxi-sid driver causing the issue,
with complete silence from the driver.
Maybe this can/will be solved at another level entirely, like having a device
core report devices probes that failed with EPROBE_DEFER some time after
the boot finished and modules had a chance to load, instead of immediately
for each probe retry.
regards,
o.
> Maxime
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"linux-sunxi" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to linux-sunxi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/linux-sunxi/20200712232942.eecoekr25i3wu2iq%40core.my.home.
