MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20190115061949.27260-1-zajec5@gmail.com> <daa97557-03fb-c266-239e-f5f1723bcef7@broadcom.com>
In-Reply-To: <daa97557-03fb-c266-239e-f5f1723bcef7@broadcom.com>
From:   =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= <zajec5@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 15 Jan 2019 12:59:07 +0100
Message-ID: <CACna6ry67zmyZoz5+ftiMMaofF-Tjz=xa1SqXKR1i+b1QhXhzQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] brcmfmac: modify __brcmf_err() to take bus as a parameter
To:     Arend Van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>
Cc:     Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>,
        "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:BROADCOM BRCM80211 IEEE802.11n WIRELESS DRIVER" 
        <brcm80211-dev-list.pdl@broadcom.com>,
        "open list:BROADCOM BRCM80211 IEEE802.11n WIRELESS DRIVER
        <brcm80211-dev-list.pdl@broadcom.com>," 
        <brcm80211-dev-list@cypress.com>,
        =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= <rafal@milecki.pl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 at 09:48, Arend Van Spriel
<arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com> wrote:
> On 1/15/2019 7:19 AM, Rafa=C5=82 Mi=C5=82ecki wrote:
> > From: Rafa=C5=82 Mi=C5=82ecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
> >
> > So far __brcmf_err() was using pr_err() which didn't allow identifying
> > device that was affected by an error. It's crucial for systems with mor=
e
> > than 1 device supported by brcmfmac (a common case for home routers).
> >
> > This change allows passing struct brcmf_bus to the __brcmf_err(). That
> > struct has been agreed to be the most common one. It allows accessing
> > struct device easily & using dev_err() printing helper.
>
> Acked-by: Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Rafa=C5=82 Mi=C5=82ecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
> > ---
> > This is my another try on improving brcmf_err after the failure from 2
> > years ago:
> > [PATCH V3 4/9] brcmfmac: add struct brcmf_pub parameter to the __brcmf_=
err
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9553255/
> >
> > Back then my change has been rejected due to miscommunication and late
> > realisation that struct brcmf_pub (a previous choice instead of struct
> > brcmf_bus) was a bad idea. Back then Arend wrote:
> >> So I would think using struct brcmf_bus in brcmf_err() would be best
> >> fit.
> >
> > So this patch follows that suggestion & updates __brcmf_err()
> > accordingly.
>
> Thanks, Rafa=C5=82
>
> Little less than two years ago I played with your idea and using GCC
> builtin __builtin_types_compatible_p(t1,t2). Anyway, it looks good. So
> you want to limit it to brcmf_err() or brcmf_dbg() as well?

I believe all messages printed by brcmfmac should specify a device.
brcmf_err, brcmf_info & brcmf_dbg.

I can work on brcmf_info & brcmf_dbg once I get done with brcmf_err :)

--=20
Rafa=C5=82