[PATCH] clk: Print the clock name in the warnings

[PATCH] clk: Print the clock name in the warnings

[Fabio Estevam]

When getting the clock related warnings, it is useful to know what
is the clock name that is causing the problem.

Add it to the warning message, so that the output becomes clearer
like this:

[    2.388129] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[    2.392883] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1 at drivers/clk/clk.c:812 clk_core_disable+0xd4/0xec
[    2.400822] clock name: uart4_ipg_gate
...

Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@nxp.com>
---
 drivers/clk/clk.c | 16 +++++++++-------
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk.c b/drivers/clk/clk.c
index 0f686a9..42dbb1f 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/clk.c
+++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c
@@ -548,7 +548,7 @@ static void clk_core_rate_unprotect(struct clk_core *core)
 	if (!core)
 		return;
 
-	if (WARN_ON(core->protect_count == 0))
+	if (WARN(core->protect_count == 0, "clock name: %s\n", core->name))
 		return;
 
 	if (--core->protect_count > 0)
@@ -681,16 +681,17 @@ static void clk_core_unprepare(struct clk_core *core)
 	if (!core)
 		return;
 
-	if (WARN_ON(core->prepare_count == 0))
+	if (WARN(core->prepare_count == 0, "clock name: %s\n", core->name))
 		return;
 
-	if (WARN_ON(core->prepare_count == 1 && core->flags & CLK_IS_CRITICAL))
+	if (WARN(core->prepare_count == 1 && core->flags & CLK_IS_CRITICAL,
+	    "clock name: %s\n", core->name))
 		return;
 
 	if (--core->prepare_count > 0)
 		return;
 
-	WARN_ON(core->enable_count > 0);
+	WARN(core->enable_count > 0, "clock name: %s\n", core->name);
 
 	trace_clk_unprepare(core);
 
@@ -808,10 +809,11 @@ static void clk_core_disable(struct clk_core *core)
 	if (!core)
 		return;
 
-	if (WARN_ON(core->enable_count == 0))
+	if (WARN(core->enable_count == 0, "clock name: %s\n", core->name))
 		return;
 
-	if (WARN_ON(core->enable_count == 1 && core->flags & CLK_IS_CRITICAL))
+	if (WARN(core->enable_count == 1 && core->flags & CLK_IS_CRITICAL,
+	    "clock name: %s\n", core->name))
 		return;
 
 	if (--core->enable_count > 0)
@@ -866,7 +868,7 @@ static int clk_core_enable(struct clk_core *core)
 	if (!core)
 		return 0;
 
-	if (WARN_ON(core->prepare_count == 0))
+	if (WARN(core->prepare_count == 0, "clock name: %s\n", core->name))
 		return -ESHUTDOWN;
 
 	if (core->enable_count == 0) {
-- 
2.7.4

Re: [PATCH] clk: Print the clock name in the warnings

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Fabio,

On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 1:42 PM, Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@nxp.com> wrote:
> When getting the clock related warnings, it is useful to know what
> is the clock name that is causing the problem.
>
> Add it to the warning message, so that the output becomes clearer
> like this:

I love your patch! Yet something to improve:

> [    2.388129] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> [    2.392883] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1 at drivers/clk/clk.c:812 clk_core_disable+0xd4/0xec
> [    2.400822] clock name: uart4_ipg_gate

This means we still have to look into the sources, to find out which
condition triggered. So what about improving the warning messages,
cfr. e.g. below?

> ...
>
> Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@nxp.com>
> ---
>  drivers/clk/clk.c | 16 +++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk.c b/drivers/clk/clk.c
> index 0f686a9..42dbb1f 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c
> @@ -548,7 +548,7 @@ static void clk_core_rate_unprotect(struct clk_core *core)
>         if (!core)
>                 return;
>
> -       if (WARN_ON(core->protect_count == 0))
> +       if (WARN(core->protect_count == 0, "clock name: %s\n", core->name))

"%s already unprotected\n"?

>                 return;
>
>         if (--core->protect_count > 0)
> @@ -681,16 +681,17 @@ static void clk_core_unprepare(struct clk_core *core)
>         if (!core)
>                 return;
>
> -       if (WARN_ON(core->prepare_count == 0))
> +       if (WARN(core->prepare_count == 0, "clock name: %s\n", core->name))

"%s already unprepared\n"?

>                 return;
>
> -       if (WARN_ON(core->prepare_count == 1 && core->flags & CLK_IS_CRITICAL))
> +       if (WARN(core->prepare_count == 1 && core->flags & CLK_IS_CRITICAL,
> +           "clock name: %s\n", core->name))

"Unpreparing critical %s\n"?

>                 return;
>
>         if (--core->prepare_count > 0)
>                 return;
>
> -       WARN_ON(core->enable_count > 0);
> +       WARN(core->enable_count > 0, "clock name: %s\n", core->name);

"Unpreparing enabled %s\n"?

>         trace_clk_unprepare(core);
>
> @@ -808,10 +809,11 @@ static void clk_core_disable(struct clk_core *core)
>         if (!core)
>                 return;
>
> -       if (WARN_ON(core->enable_count == 0))
> +       if (WARN(core->enable_count == 0, "clock name: %s\n", core->name))

"%s already disabled\n"?

>                 return;
>
> -       if (WARN_ON(core->enable_count == 1 && core->flags & CLK_IS_CRITICAL))
> +       if (WARN(core->enable_count == 1 && core->flags & CLK_IS_CRITICAL,
> +           "clock name: %s\n", core->name))

"Disabling critical %s\n"?

>                 return;
>
>         if (--core->enable_count > 0)
> @@ -866,7 +868,7 @@ static int clk_core_enable(struct clk_core *core)
>         if (!core)
>                 return 0;
>
> -       if (WARN_ON(core->prepare_count == 0))
> +       if (WARN(core->prepare_count == 0, "clock name: %s\n", core->name))

"Enabling unprepared %s\n"?

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

Re: [PATCH] clk: Print the clock name in the warnings

[Fabio Estevam]

Hi Geert,

On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:19 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
<geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:

> This means we still have to look into the sources, to find out which
> condition triggered. So what about improving the warning messages,
> cfr. e.g. below?

Thanks for your suggestion. I did it like this in v2.

Thanks