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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230522200033.2605-1-mario.limonciello@amd.com>
 <20230522200033.2605-4-mario.limonciello@amd.com> <e9eb526d-84fe-b814-67a3-6f7977aa0078@redhat.com>
 <MN0PR12MB6101AF7606A3547EC5AA42A7E2409@MN0PR12MB6101.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
 <dcdb3d12-e0af-5e4d-119e-d4fbe9a9495b@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <dcdb3d12-e0af-5e4d-119e-d4fbe9a9495b@redhat.com>
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Date:   Thu, 25 May 2023 14:06:46 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0h=tSKjZxQJECZCQqzWDMAwY8cKf7F_xyLQSBG8TPyzrg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] platform/x86/amd: pmc: Use pm_pr_dbg() for suspend
 related messages
To:     Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Cc:     "Limonciello, Mario" <Mario.Limonciello@amd.com>,
        "rafael@kernel.org" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        "linus.walleij@linaro.org" <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
        "platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org" 
        <platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        "S-k, Shyam-sundar" <Shyam-sundar.S-k@amd.com>,
        "Natikar, Basavaraj" <Basavaraj.Natikar@amd.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 12:13 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Mario,
>
> On 5/23/23 18:21, Limonciello, Mario wrote:
> > [AMD Official Use Only - General]
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2023 6:08 AM
> >> To: Limonciello, Mario <Mario.Limonciello@amd.com>; rafael@kernel.org;
> >> linus.walleij@linaro.org
> >> Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-
> >> gpio@vger.kernel.org; platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org; linux-
> >> pm@vger.kernel.org; S-k, Shyam-sundar <Shyam-sundar.S-k@amd.com>;
> >> Natikar, Basavaraj <Basavaraj.Natikar@amd.com>
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] platform/x86/amd: pmc: Use pm_pr_dbg() for
> >> suspend related messages
> >>
> >> Hi Mario,
> >>
> >> On 5/22/23 22:00, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> >>> Using pm_pr_dbg() allows users to toggle
> >> `/sys/power/pm_debug_messages`
> >>> as a single knob to turn on messages that amd-pmc can emit to aid in
> >>> any s2idle debugging.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>  drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmc.c | 4 ++--
> >>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmc.c
> >> b/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmc.c
> >>> index 427905714f79..1304cd6f13f6 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmc.c
> >>> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmc.c
> >>> @@ -543,7 +543,7 @@ static int amd_pmc_idlemask_read(struct
> >> amd_pmc_dev *pdev, struct device *dev,
> >>>     }
> >>>
> >>>     if (dev)
> >>> -           dev_dbg(pdev->dev, "SMU idlemask s0i3: 0x%x\n", val);
> >>> +           pm_pr_dbg("SMU idlemask s0i3: 0x%x\n", val);
> >>>
> >>>     if (s)
> >>>             seq_printf(s, "SMU idlemask : 0x%x\n", val);
> >>
> >> This does not compile, amd/pmc.c may be build as an amd-pmc.ko module
> >> and currently the pm_debug_messages_on flag used by pm_pr_dbg()
> >> is not exported to modules:
> >>
> >>   CC [M]  drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmc.o
> >>   LD [M]  drivers/platform/x86/amd/amd-pmc.o
> >>   MODPOST Module.symvers
> >> ERROR: modpost: "pm_debug_messages_on"
> >> [drivers/platform/x86/amd/amd-pmc.ko] undefined!
> >> make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.modpost:136: Module.symvers] Error 1
> >> make: *** [Makefile:1978: modpost] Error 2
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Hans
> >>
> >
> > My apologies, yes I was compiling in when testing.  Let me ask if this
> > series makes sense and is "generally" agreeable though.
>
> I have no objections against this series, otherwise I don't really
> have a strong opinion on this series.
>
> If this makes sense and if exporting pm_debug_messages_on is ok
> is Rafael's call to make IMHO.
>
> Rafael ?

I have no strong opinion.

I would do it slightly differently as mentioned in my reply to patch
[1/4] (and then the new function could be used in patch [2/4] I
think).

Otherwise this is fine with me if it helps to debug failures in the field.