Received: by 2002:a25:c205:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id s5csp752754ybf; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 22:37:31 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw7F4UBXvvKviISLbVdd330RrySCgUMg94x3uuzfraWgGaTt4pV0EVEwqkYcR2irbUDRVwE X-Received: by 2002:a9d:2264:: with SMTP id o91mr2099129ota.328.1582785451792; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 22:37:31 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1582785451; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=Bj+Q3etMSeifKCSt4OPdIMwY9D/d1eEczvK3rNmkfjLXiPW269I0LrNCok1U2IloMt y6LmbqPXlIxBQoemD9xCnZ963/VJvbsuosJTQblNF7wbuZxGqHLrWPpIsJiI2gr4Xiz1 s0l7/ZVuKkp8XQZwXaVecDS+2XO879dLsy4c8ksToKm5hUlyxnOOQaAjoBdbZ+RTxCl8 ZK/vUjjbSSYM+vUPF0uJiXyRjCRiceEpCVsAC15BxeBG52lgCYfeCFC7hqAxajQueF3L ZDC1PilcqRyeG0ULdzwlpS2TNTYcn4Iqq2KTLvPrcEMaqJiSAesEJQOCI7BQvTPnzwls p6UQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding :content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :message-id:from:references:cc:to:subject; bh=Ep1VUlkJmbN9fPKr2smHSqnjcq7dTJFQlzGDl5++cms=; b=og1nkwrZmavEc+mnDo7Qg+uQPlvhbfb9mE9KlA7dGS/oZ7cjPGPRTWhYiXW65KbqlF zz4fyxzWaw3xo4pE4iumaRxjlgl8oo0a1M/A9Jz448kfCdcC+QIKcJOnKN6z+N7waL44 RcKLegcALyPViS3lVnUYCW2OCUr6MhndMkHKk/ZjZ1kwmUDhOZXNENP4baWVYlRbkCJb KwomYL77P1U4yygD23cCE2WQQaHkG2UC7HaEbW8PCQNOUacylGsoZm1NdMOvm2MzBysa yF1kKoUom2E7s96rZp9Z8UHSDzO9SlQyOdBlNt+Dq63e9wqt07FIuhz8w+rFAJZs94sy lVyw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id i3si1045844otc.272.2020.02.26.22.37.18; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 22:37:31 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727336AbgB0GhK (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 27 Feb 2020 01:37:10 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:59066 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726575AbgB0GhK (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Feb 2020 01:37:10 -0500 Received: from [10.44.0.22] (unknown [103.48.210.53]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AAF3F24672; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 06:37:07 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/18] m68k: Replace setup_irq() by request_irq() To: Finn Thain Cc: afzal mohammed , linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Geert Uytterhoeven References: <00b0bf964278dd0bb3e093283994399ff796cca5.1582471508.git.afzal.mohd.ma@gmail.com> <73c3ad08-963d-fea2-91d7-b06e4ef8d3ef@linux-m68k.org> From: Greg Ungerer Message-ID: <1a16c680-2bbe-eb24-6ea3-4b50d0c3e377@linux-m68k.org> Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 16:37:04 +1000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 27/2/20 8:31 am, Finn Thain wrote: > On Wed, 26 Feb 2020, Greg Ungerer wrote: > >> On 26/2/20 4:39 pm, Finn Thain wrote: >>> >>> If -EBUSY means the end user has misconfigured something, printing >>> "request_irq failed" would be helpful. But does that still happen? >> >> I have seen it many times. Its not at all difficult to get interrupt >> assignments wrong, duplicated, or otherwise mistaken when creating >> device trees. Not so much m68k/coldfire platforms where they are most >> commonly hard coded. >> > > I was thinking of end users and production builds. You seem to be > concerned about developers. Catering to developers argues for pr_debug() > here, if anything. Perhaps. But most of the kernel boot output as it stands today is more debug (or maybe notice) than useful. > You say you've seen -16 errors "many times". Have you also seen -22? Did > the ability to distinguish these values help you to fix your device tree? Probably not. But the real difficulty is trying to diagnose other peoples problems with just console trace output. The more information there the better. >>> ... >>> >>> BTW, one of the benefits of "%s: request_irq failed" is that a >>> compilation unit with multiple request_irq calls permits the compiler >>> to coalesce all duplicated format strings. Whereas, that's not >>> possible with "foo: request_irq failed" and "bar: request_irq failed". >> >> Given the wide variety of message text used with failed request_irq() >> calls it would be shear luck that this matched anything else. A quick >> grep shows that "%s: request_irq() failed\n" has no other exact matches >> in the current kernel source. >> > > You are overlooking the patches in this series that produce multiple > identical format strings. No I didn't :-) None of these will end up compiled in at the same time. The various ColdFire SoC parts have a single timer hardware module - and only the required one will be compiled in, not all of them. Regards Greg