Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [net v3 PATCH] net: ethernet: ti: cpsw_new: fix error handling in
 cpsw_ndo_vlan_rx_kill_vid()
To:     David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
CC:     <kuba@kernel.org>, <grygorii.strashko@ti.com>, <nsekhar@ti.com>,
        <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20200824170100.21319-1-m-karicheri2@ti.com>
 <20200825.093603.2026695844604591106.davem@davemloft.net>
From:   Murali Karicheri <m-karicheri2@ti.com>
Message-ID: <5be2b575-238c-247f-db9a-95680984e26d@ti.com>
Date:   Thu, 27 Aug 2020 09:00:48 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200825.093603.2026695844604591106.davem@davemloft.net>
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

Hi Dave,

On 8/25/20 12:36 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Murali Karicheri <m-karicheri2@ti.com>
> Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 13:01:00 -0400
> 
>> +	ret = cpsw_ale_del_vlan(cpsw->ale, vid, 0);
>> +	if (ret)
>> +		dev_err(priv->dev, "%s: failed %d: ret %d\n",
>> +			__func__, __LINE__, ret);
>> +	ret = cpsw_ale_del_ucast(cpsw->ale, priv->mac_addr,
>> +				 HOST_PORT_NUM, ALE_VLAN, vid);
>> +	if (ret)
>> +		dev_err(priv->dev, "%s: failed %d: ret %d\n",
>> +			__func__, __LINE__, ret);
>> +	ret = cpsw_ale_del_mcast(cpsw->ale, priv->ndev->broadcast,
>> +				 0, ALE_VLAN, vid);
>> +	if (ret)
>> +		dev_err(priv->dev, "%s: failed %d: ret %d\n",
>> +			__func__, __LINE__, ret);
>>   	cpsw_ale_flush_multicast(cpsw->ale, ALE_PORT_HOST, vid);
> 
> These error messages are extremely unhelpful.  You're calling three
> different functions, yet emitting basically the same __func__ for
> each of those cases.  No user can send you a useful bug report
> immediately if they just have func and line.
> 
> Please get rid of the "__func__" and "__line__" stuff completely, it's
> never advisable to ever use that in my opinion.  Instead, describe
> which delete operation failed, optionally with the error return.
> 
OK. I had considered your suggestion, but thought having a line number
would be handy for a developer. Function name would be better. Will
re-send with changes as you have suggested.

-- 
Murali Karicheri
Texas Instruments