Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] treewide: Remove dev_err() usage after platform_get_irq() | From | Stephen Boyd <> | Date | Tue, 23 Jul 2019 15:24:53 -0700 |
| |
Quoting Rob Herring (2019-07-23 12:30:48) > On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 12:16 PM Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org> wrote: > > > > We don't need dev_err() messages when platform_get_irq() fails now that > > platform_get_irq() prints an error message itself when something goes > > wrong. Let's remove these prints with a simple semantic patch. > > Nice. Would be nice to see this for other commonly called functions in > probe though we have deal with cases of failure being okay. > > > > > // <smpl> > > @@ > > expression ret; > > struct platform_device *E; > > @@ > > > > ret = > > ( > > platform_get_irq(E, ...) > > | > > platform_get_irq_byname(E, ...) > > ); > > > > if ( \( ret < 0 \| ret <= 0 \) ) > > { > > ( > > -if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER) > > -{ ... > > -dev_err(...); > > -... } > > | > > ... > > -dev_err(...); > > What about cases of pr_err, pr_warn, etc.? And the subsystem specific > prints like edac_printk and DRM_ERROR/DRM_DEV_ERROR.
I can add more variants to the script and maybe catch some more prints. Is that what you're asking for?
> > There's also some cases that the irq seems to be optional. They use > dev_info, but will now have an error level print. That's fine with me, > but some may complain...
Yeah I wonder if there should be a platform_get_irq_optional() API that more explicitly indicates this and then doesn't print a warning when the irq isn't there.
| |