Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 16 Aug 2022 12:08:46 -0300
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
To:     Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>
Cc:     Diana Craciun <diana.craciun@oss.nxp.com>,
        Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
        Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
        kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vfio/fsl-mc: Fix a typo in a comment
Message-ID: <Yvuy/qUwU7StueDV@ziepe.ca>
References: <2b65bf8d2b4d940cafbafcede07c23c35f042f5a.1659815764.git.christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>
 <YvKJTKYv2htxM1n/@ziepe.ca>
 <db505c50-e855-5e94-1f09-173310177bda@wanadoo.fr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <db505c50-e855-5e94-1f09-173310177bda@wanadoo.fr>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 05:00:50PM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> Le 09/08/2022 à 18:20, Jason Gunthorpe a écrit :
> > On Sat, Aug 06, 2022 at 09:56:13PM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> > > L and S are swapped/
> > > s/VFIO_FLS_MC/VFIO_FSL_MC/
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>
> > > ---
> > > All the dev_ logging functions in the file have the "VFIO_FSL_MC: "
> > > prefix.
> > > As they are dev_ function, the driver should already be displayed.
> > > 
> > > So, does it make sense or could they be all removed?
> > > ---
> > >   drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc.c | 2 +-
> > >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc.c b/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc.c
> > > index 3feff729f3ce..66d01db1d240 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/vfio/fsl-mc/vfio_fsl_mc.c
> > > @@ -110,7 +110,7 @@ static void vfio_fsl_mc_close_device(struct vfio_device *core_vdev)
> > >   	if (WARN_ON(ret))
> > >   		dev_warn(&mc_cont->dev,
> > > -			 "VFIO_FLS_MC: reset device has failed (%d)\n", ret);
> > > +			 "VFIO_FSL_MC: reset device has failed (%d)\n", ret);
> > 
> > WARN_ON already prints, this is better written as
> > 
> > WARN(ret, "VFIO_FSL_MC: reset device has failed (%d)\n", ret);
> 
> Or maybe, just:
> if (ret)
> 	dev_warn(&mc_cont->dev,
> 		 "VFIO_FSL_MC: reset device has failed (%d)\n", ret);
> 
> This keep information about the device, avoid the duplicate printing related
> to WARN_ON+dev_warn and is more in line with error handling in other files.
> 
> Do you agree or do you prefer a v2 as you proposed with WARN()?

If the original author wrote WARN I would not degrade it to just a
dev_warn.

Jason