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;
From:   Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
        Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>
Cc:     Diana Craciun <diana.craciun@oss.nxp.com>,
        Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@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
In-Reply-To: <Yvuy/qUwU7StueDV@ziepe.ca>
Organization: Red Hat GmbH
References: <2b65bf8d2b4d940cafbafcede07c23c35f042f5a.1659815764.git.christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>
 <YvKJTKYv2htxM1n/@ziepe.ca>
 <db505c50-e855-5e94-1f09-173310177bda@wanadoo.fr>
 <Yvuy/qUwU7StueDV@ziepe.ca>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.36 (https://notmuchmail.org)
Date:   Mon, 22 Aug 2022 11:14:38 +0200
Message-ID: <871qt8prlt.fsf@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Aug 16 2022, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca> wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 05:00:50PM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
>> Le 09/08/2022 =C3=A0 18:20, Jason Gunthorpe a =C3=A9crit=C2=A0:
>> > 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/
>> > >=20
>> > > 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.
>> > >=20
>> > > 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(-)
>> > >=20
>> > > 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);
>> >=20
>> > WARN_ON already prints, this is better written as
>> >=20
>> > WARN(ret, "VFIO_FSL_MC: reset device has failed (%d)\n", ret);
>>=20
>> Or maybe, just:
>> if (ret)
>> 	dev_warn(&mc_cont->dev,
>> 		 "VFIO_FSL_MC: reset device has failed (%d)\n", ret);
>>=20
>> This keep information about the device, avoid the duplicate printing rel=
ated
>> to WARN_ON+dev_warn and is more in line with error handling in other fil=
es.
>>=20
>> 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.

Having to decide between losing the WARN and losing the device info, I'd
just... fix the typo :)