From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([2001:67c:670:201:290:27ff:fe1d:cc33]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1gU5x0-0003Sv-Ns for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 04 Dec 2018 08:21:04 +0000 From: Roland Hieber Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2018 09:20:38 +0100 Message-Id: <20181204082038.360-1-r.hieber@pengutronix.de> In-Reply-To: <20181204074958.x6bntw4czthc75ye@pengutronix.de> References: <20181204074958.x6bntw4czthc75ye@pengutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "barebox" Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: [PATCH] fixup! drivers: caam: add RNG software self-test To: Barebox Mailing List Cc: Roland Hieber Demote this warning to an info because the failure is expected and we can work around it. The self-test will still error afterwards in case of failure. Signed-off-by: Roland Hieber --- On Tue, Dec 04, 2018 at 08:49:58AM +0100, Sascha Hauer wrote: > On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 11:52:26AM +0100, Roland Hieber wrote: > > Hi Sascha, > > > > > + pr_notice("RNG software self-test passed\n"); > > > > I noticed that you downgraded this to a pr_info() when applying the > > patch, is there a reason? pr_warn()s have the "WARNING:" prefix, > > pr_notice()s have a "NOTICE:" prefix, but pr_info()s don't have any > > prefix. I think this one should be a pr_notice because it overrides the > > pr_warn("RNG self-test failure detected...") from HAB and tells the user > > that this warning is no longer relevant. With pr_info(), I think it will > > get lost between all the other infos. > > I can follow this argumentation, but then I argue we should lower the > priority of the failure detected message to to pr_info or even pr_debug, > because the failure is pretty much expected, it is correctly being > worked around and there's nothing we can do about the failure. Right, that argumentation seems more reasonable to me. - Roland --- drivers/hab/habv4.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/hab/habv4.c b/drivers/hab/habv4.c index bab458ae32..cca46c1490 100644 --- a/drivers/hab/habv4.c +++ b/drivers/hab/habv4.c @@ -455,7 +455,7 @@ static int habv4_get_status(const struct habv4_rvt *rvt) } if (is_rng_fail_event) { - pr_warning("RNG self-test failure detected, will run software self-test\n"); + pr_info("RNG self-test failure detected, will run software self-test\n"); habv4_need_rng_software_self_test = true; } else { pr_err("-------- HAB warning Event %d --------\n", index); -- 2.19.1 _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox