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.