Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932971Ab2K0AYS (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Nov 2012 19:24:18 -0500 Received: from mail-ie0-f174.google.com ([209.85.223.174]:54362 "EHLO mail-ie0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755440Ab2K0AYQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Nov 2012 19:24:16 -0500 Message-ID: <50B4082C.5000104@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 18:24:12 -0600 From: Rob Herring User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121028 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linus Walleij CC: Grant Likely , Linus Walleij , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Anmar Oueja , Paul Mundt , Russell King , Lee Jones Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4 v2] irqdomain: augment add_simple() to allocate descs References: <1349076922-25874-1-git-send-email-linus.walleij@stericsson.com> <20121126202601.625213E0A04@localhost> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2149 Lines: 49 On 11/26/2012 06:13 PM, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Grant Likely wrote: > >>> + if (irq_base < 0) { >>> + WARN(1, "Cannot allocate irq_descs @ IRQ%d, assuming pre-allocated\n", >>> + first_irq); >>> + irq_base = first_irq; >> >> As I just commented on the previous version, WARN() is probably too >> verbose (and scary). Make it an informational. > > So the discussion began with me removing exactly that kind of WARN() > from arch/arm/common/gic.c: > http://marc.info/?l=linux-arm-kernel&m=134860088710574&w=2 > > Which was NACKed by Rob: > http://marc.info/?l=linux-arm-kernel&m=134860136515611&w=2 > Who prefered to leave it in to encourage platforms to get fixed. > > This code just follows exactly that pattern. > > I'm happy to patch out *both* (or rather patch gic.c to use > irq_domain_add_simple()) because I never quite liked > it in the first place. > >> However, I see another problem. What is the requested range straddles >> the boundary between reserved and non-reserved IRQs? It would be good to >> give some information about which irq range was requested and maybe >> report which ones were available.... or check to see if the request is >> inside or partially inside the reserved region? > > Right now the usual symptom of that is that the system hangs. > > Do you mean we should probe around a bit with > irq_get_next_irq() to figure out more precisely what the > problem is, or did you have something more elegant > in mind? My objection was removing completely (which a pr_debug effectively does). I think Grant is saying just make the warning more informative about why it failed which is fine with me. nr_irqs is already printed out, so that provides some info already (although it is pretty terse). Rob -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/