lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Mar]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] Driver core: Reduce the level of request_firmware() messages
    Date
    On Monday 15 March 2010, Greg KH wrote:
    > On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 01:43:54AM +0530, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
    > > Hello Rafael,
    > >
    > > On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 1:24 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
    > > > On Sunday 28 February 2010, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
    > > >>
    > > >> On Sun, 2010-02-28 at 13:13 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
    > > >> > On Sunday 28 February 2010, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
    > > >> > > On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 2:13 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
    > > >> > > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
    > > >> > > >
    > > >> > > > The messages from _request_firmware() informing that firmware is
    > > >> > > > being requested or built-in firmware is going to be used are printed
    > > >> > > > at KERN_INFO, which produces lots of noise on systems with huge
    > > >> > > > numbers of AMD CPUs. Reduce the level of these messages to
    > > >> > > > KERN_DEBUG to get rid of that noise.
    > > >> > > >
    > > >> > >
    > > >> > > Which firmware we are using is very useful information. Because of
    > > >> > > huge numbers of CPUs it seems noise then better provide the
    > > >> > > information for first cpu and for the rest of the CPUs you can show by
    > > >> > > KERN_DEBUG.
    > > >> >
    > > >> > That would have been better indeed, but the problem is _request_firmware()
    > > >> > doesn't allow us to change the level of its messages on demand.
    > > >>
    > > >> Can we try this :
    > > >>
    > > >> if (smp_processor_id())
    > > >> dev_dbg(..);
    > > >> else
    > > >> dev_info(..);
    > > >
    > > > Well, it doesn't look particularly nice, does it?
    > > >
    > > > Besides, say we're requesting firmware for a non-CPU device which happens
    > > > to run on CPU1. Then, dev_dbg() will be used, which most likely is not what we
    > > > want.
    > > >
    > >
    > > Yes, you are right. But atleast can you try it once and show the
    > > output with and without this.
    >
    > Was there ever a resolution to this?

    Nope.

    > Rafael, do you want me to apply your original patch now?

    I still think it's a good idea. The information about what firmware is being
    used doesn't seem to be very useful for anything but debugging, so I think
    KERN_DEBUG is actually the right level for these messages.

    Rafael


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-03-15 22:27    [W:0.021 / U:1.436 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site