From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Russell King - ARM Linux Subject: Re: OMAP34xx Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 18:08:12 +0000 Message-ID: <20120205180812.GH17309@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <20120204185453.GB17309@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20120204190109.GL20333@atomide.com> <20120204203453.GD17309@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20120205172528.GA17029@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20120205174700.GU20333@atomide.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:51065 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751799Ab2BESIZ (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Feb 2012 13:08:25 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120205174700.GU20333@atomide.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Tony Lindgren Cc: Tero Kristo , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann , Olof Johansson On Sun, Feb 05, 2012 at 09:47:00AM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Russell King - ARM Linux [120205 08:54]: > > I'm also getting on the OMAP4430SDP: > > > > Error setting wl12xx data > > > > What a wonderfully descriptive error message. Not. What happened to > > saying _why_ we couldn't set the data? As for this: > > > > platform_device_register(&omap_vwlan_device); > > > > and not checking the return code, I really don't see why anyone bothered > > even reporting that wl12xx_set_platform_data() failed... why not just > > leave people in the dark over the error... > > > > Right, so, this "error" is happening because the WL12xx driver is not > > configured, and from what I can see, the WL12xx is something you'd plug > > in to the board instead of the SD card. So it makes no sense to report > > an error for a driver for a bit of hardware which is optional. > > > > So... my patch gets larger and gets this fixed for all platforms in > > mach-omap2. > > That sounds like a good clean-up for next merge window. So in the meantime, people should put up with the kernel reporting an "Error" at error-message level at boot time because they didn't configure something? No, it needs fixing, because it doesn't justify being an error. It's wrong, plain and simple. Again, if you don't want to send it during -rc, I'll send it to Linus as a patch for him to decide whether he wants to take it as -rc material.