Messages in this thread | | | From | Alim Akhtar <> | Date | Wed, 15 Oct 2014 01:34:00 +0530 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] mmc: dw_mmc: Change signal voltage error to dev_dbg() |
| |
Hi Doug,
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 9:57 PM, Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> wrote: > Alim, > > On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 5:02 AM, Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@gmail.com> wrote: >>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c >>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c >>> @@ -1075,7 +1075,7 @@ static int dw_mci_switch_voltage(struct mmc_host *mmc, struct mmc_ios *ios) >>> ret = regulator_set_voltage(mmc->supply.vqmmc, min_uv, max_uv); >>> >>> if (ret) { >>> - dev_err(&mmc->class_dev, >>> + dev_dbg(&mmc->class_dev, >>> "Regulator set error %d: %d - %d\n", >>> ret, min_uv, max_uv); >>> return ret; >> Well, I am ok with this but this info is very useful, what if PMIC >> failed to actually set the voltage? may be because of some PMIC driver >> bug or i2c driver bug? Ofcourse this can be found by turning MMC_DEBUG >> ON, but is that worth in this case. Or is there a way to print that, >> this failure is because of a regulator re-try? >> your thoughts? > > I think that the regulator framework and the i2c framework are > supposed to be reliable. If they aren't reliable there will be lots > of places that will have problems. I think that you _could_: > > * In your regulator driver print an error when an i2c transfer fails. > > * In your regulator driver print an error if some unexpected event > happens (like a regulator reports that the voltage didn't actually > change). > > That would get you want you want, right? ...but an error here doesn't > belong and that's pretty much determined by (28f92b5 mmc: core: Try > other signal levels during power up). That patch wants to be able to > try several different voltage levels and if we print an error in that > case then it's going to be very confusing to the user. > Hmm...Ok, convincing enough to me, so Reviewed-by: Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@samsung.com> > -Doug
-- Regards, Alim
| |