Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: report driver's successful {un}registration
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 07:43:07PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > But I faced the issue when I had to see some test reports from the > automated stuff and wanted to see if cpufreq is up and running. Sorry, this is a very specialized usage to enforce meaningless spew in dmesg on *everybody*. Fix your tests instead. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine. -- -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: report driver's successful {un}registration
On 10 July 2014 19:37, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 05:38:23PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: >> The problem with that is: CPUFreq may not be compiled in at all and we >> wouldn't know the difference between success and absence. > > Of course you would: /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/ Yeah, with a local board its easily detectable. But I faced the issue when I had to see some test reports from the automated stuff and wanted to see if cpufreq is up and running. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: report driver's successful {un}registration
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 05:38:23PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > The problem with that is: CPUFreq may not be compiled in at all and we > wouldn't know the difference between success and absence. Of course you would: /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/ -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine. -- -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: report driver's successful {un}registration
On 10 July 2014 17:29, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 05:21:43PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: >> So that it appears in boot logs and we know cpufreq registered properly. > > So flip that logic: Don't say anything in the success case and issue an > error only when it failed. Like the rest of the code does it. The problem with that is: CPUFreq may not be compiled in at all and we wouldn't know the difference between success and absence. And so tried to add a print, like any other driver would do. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: report driver's successful {un}registration
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 05:21:43PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > So that it appears in boot logs and we know cpufreq registered properly. So flip that logic: Don't say anything in the success case and issue an error only when it failed. Like the rest of the code does it. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine. -- -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: report driver's successful {un}registration
On 10 July 2014 17:18, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 02:21:30PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> We do report driver's successful {un}registration from cpufreq core, but is
>> done
>> with pr_debug() and so this doesn't appear in boot logs.
>>
>> Convert this to pr_info() to make it visible in logs.
>
> And we want this because...?
So that it appears in boot logs and we know cpufreq registered properly.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: report driver's successful {un}registration
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 02:21:30PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> We do report driver's successful {un}registration from cpufreq core, but is
> done
> with pr_debug() and so this doesn't appear in boot logs.
>
> Convert this to pr_info() to make it visible in logs.
And we want this because...?
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: report driver's successful {un}registration
On 06/26/2014 02:21 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> We do report driver's successful {un}registration from cpufreq core, but is
> done
> with pr_debug() and so this doesn't appear in boot logs.
>
> Convert this to pr_info() to make it visible in logs.
>
While at it, let's also standardize those messages, since they will be
more visible now.
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> index 62259d2..63d8f8f 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> @@ -2468,7 +2468,7 @@ int cpufreq_register_driver(struct cpufreq_driver
> *driver_data)
> }
>
> register_hotcpu_notifier(_cpu_notifier);
> - pr_debug("driver %s up and running\n", driver_data->name);
> + pr_info("driver %s up and running\n", driver_data->name);
How about "Registered cpufreq driver: %s\n"
>
> return 0;
> err_if_unreg:
> @@ -2499,7 +2499,7 @@ int cpufreq_unregister_driver(struct cpufreq_driver
> *driver)
> if (!cpufreq_driver || (driver != cpufreq_driver))
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - pr_debug("unregistering driver %s\n", driver->name);
> + pr_info("unregistering driver %s\n", driver->name);
And "Unregistered cpufreq driver: %s\n"
(Also, its probably a good idea to have 2 prints here, just like we have for
cpufreq_register_driver() - one with pr_debug() at the beginning of the
function which tells us that we are *about* to register the driver, and then
a second print with pr_info() at the end of the function that tells us that
we successfully registered the driver. We can do the same thing for
unregistration as well.)
>
> subsys_interface_unregister(_interface);
> if (cpufreq_boost_supported())
>
Regards,
Srivatsa S. Bhat
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: report driver's successful {un}registration
On 06/26/2014 02:21 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
We do report driver's successful {un}registration from cpufreq core, but is
done
with pr_debug() and so this doesn't appear in boot logs.
Convert this to pr_info() to make it visible in logs.
While at it, let's also standardize those messages, since they will be
more visible now.
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
index 62259d2..63d8f8f 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
@@ -2468,7 +2468,7 @@ int cpufreq_register_driver(struct cpufreq_driver
*driver_data)
}
register_hotcpu_notifier(cpufreq_cpu_notifier);
- pr_debug(driver %s up and running\n, driver_data-name);
+ pr_info(driver %s up and running\n, driver_data-name);
How about Registered cpufreq driver: %s\n
return 0;
err_if_unreg:
@@ -2499,7 +2499,7 @@ int cpufreq_unregister_driver(struct cpufreq_driver
*driver)
if (!cpufreq_driver || (driver != cpufreq_driver))
return -EINVAL;
- pr_debug(unregistering driver %s\n, driver-name);
+ pr_info(unregistering driver %s\n, driver-name);
And Unregistered cpufreq driver: %s\n
(Also, its probably a good idea to have 2 prints here, just like we have for
cpufreq_register_driver() - one with pr_debug() at the beginning of the
function which tells us that we are *about* to register the driver, and then
a second print with pr_info() at the end of the function that tells us that
we successfully registered the driver. We can do the same thing for
unregistration as well.)
subsys_interface_unregister(cpufreq_interface);
if (cpufreq_boost_supported())
Regards,
Srivatsa S. Bhat
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: report driver's successful {un}registration
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 02:21:30PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
We do report driver's successful {un}registration from cpufreq core, but is
done
with pr_debug() and so this doesn't appear in boot logs.
Convert this to pr_info() to make it visible in logs.
And we want this because...?
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: report driver's successful {un}registration
On 10 July 2014 17:18, Borislav Petkov b...@alien8.de wrote:
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 02:21:30PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
We do report driver's successful {un}registration from cpufreq core, but is
done
with pr_debug() and so this doesn't appear in boot logs.
Convert this to pr_info() to make it visible in logs.
And we want this because...?
So that it appears in boot logs and we know cpufreq registered properly.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: report driver's successful {un}registration
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 05:21:43PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: So that it appears in boot logs and we know cpufreq registered properly. So flip that logic: Don't say anything in the success case and issue an error only when it failed. Like the rest of the code does it. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine. -- -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: report driver's successful {un}registration
On 10 July 2014 17:29, Borislav Petkov b...@alien8.de wrote: On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 05:21:43PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: So that it appears in boot logs and we know cpufreq registered properly. So flip that logic: Don't say anything in the success case and issue an error only when it failed. Like the rest of the code does it. The problem with that is: CPUFreq may not be compiled in at all and we wouldn't know the difference between success and absence. And so tried to add a print, like any other driver would do. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: report driver's successful {un}registration
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 05:38:23PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: The problem with that is: CPUFreq may not be compiled in at all and we wouldn't know the difference between success and absence. Of course you would: /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/ -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine. -- -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: report driver's successful {un}registration
On 10 July 2014 19:37, Borislav Petkov b...@alien8.de wrote: On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 05:38:23PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: The problem with that is: CPUFreq may not be compiled in at all and we wouldn't know the difference between success and absence. Of course you would: /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/ Yeah, with a local board its easily detectable. But I faced the issue when I had to see some test reports from the automated stuff and wanted to see if cpufreq is up and running. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: report driver's successful {un}registration
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 07:43:07PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: But I faced the issue when I had to see some test reports from the automated stuff and wanted to see if cpufreq is up and running. Sorry, this is a very specialized usage to enforce meaningless spew in dmesg on *everybody*. Fix your tests instead. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine. -- -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
