Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 14 Apr 2022 12:44:13 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v6 3/3] EDAC: nuvoton: Add NPCM memory controller driver | From | Paul Menzel <> |
| |
Dear Borislav,
Am 14.04.22 um 12:15 schrieb Borislav Petkov: > On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 10:56:43AM +0200, Paul Menzel wrote: >> No idea, why you had to ask this question, while you statement before >> already made the point. > > You've told Medad one thing. I told him the complete opposite.
When? I must have missed your comment then?
> Medad as new submitter gets confused. And I don't want patch > submitters to get confused by review. > > So, if you're unsure about a review feedback, don't give it pls.
Also during review errors can happen, can’t they? I apologized, and then you for catching it.
>> Sorry I do not get your point. Would you elaborate on the debug message so >> it’s more useful? > > Just think of the big picture: is my error message useful enough for > debugging or would I have to go and add more info to it so that I can > debug an issue? > > Example: > > There is > > edac_dbg(3, "InterruptStatus : 0x%x\n", intr_status); > > now. > > Now, how about this? > > edac_dbg(3, "dev: %s, id: %s: IRQ: %d, interrupt status: 0x%x\n", > mci->dev_name, mci->ctl_name, irq, intr_status); > > Which one, do you think, is more helpful to a person trying to debug any > potential issue with the interrupt handler and the ECCs it is supposed > to issue?
I am all for more elaborate log messages, but have the feeling, you think I am not? Where does the misunderstanding come from?
Kind regards,
Paul
| |