From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM,FROM_EXCESS_BASE64, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3B20C43381 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 12:47:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84DAB218FF for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 12:47:04 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="PdcrG8mv" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2406963AbfBNMrD (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Feb 2019 07:47:03 -0500 Received: from mail-yb1-f193.google.com ([209.85.219.193]:44518 "EHLO mail-yb1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727958AbfBNMrD (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Feb 2019 07:47:03 -0500 Received: by mail-yb1-f193.google.com with SMTP id b15so2305780ybn.11 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 04:47:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=4gyTzGabvmYvtZ0trvKTxteU2ppHrR2McLgybLK1zKA=; b=PdcrG8mvWb9bKYzihCn6iNTYEZs2y3gKJ4PB47WLcVxRHcyFfEqhYTaqnjvXMVrmgl xbrh9q2CG6E8QcEefwjazCHtgR9mC9DKRSERlgSEg2gOArJJCadSpOUAAsEzfWxJyWlk QDNT2z0Asu5ukN00igFvKGaaR+5Emq9Fjuwo0RzB1eBHTncENiV4c/844bNUAnzMzvrL gypuoWTaF0nwMywwffFGyjsD7wquxB17YkUl5kxckvGa3Bsj3KW8ZZZCOkCfnkpMbi46 lU9yS5JlpMGTN54sZeCprMvks82hILtRSkqJyXJpvPcrZIG552qXIoNfnXEe0MoQ9+w7 KLYQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=4gyTzGabvmYvtZ0trvKTxteU2ppHrR2McLgybLK1zKA=; b=fgNqFMmw9jiy2DDm+hzy6dZ7WRcMlQba8HJkE8wVZo2cxKcQ8+hzupyiLyaTriHCDN zu62Dk5TBOqa+/YoT6/epfsVJwFdx9U+xaDDAHjPBpEKSVXuwtS9S4XNaUW86FO8R8T9 FPRDo1r8FuXRviRUyno2Bujd8G1bvxtXRqc54QyAhdhi85Z4nQwKGnKgUPr5PW/fmQ9c W99bwkv/Lcn+p/NLFtVkl4fJCE2l6sz6beYMXLW5mS0chDETGCiavR4J3CLVmbljkQfY LB2IDo2pGRTaVqelFXWNCb4OEp5Gb5IZXSdusDKW5/xFUGIkFIqWBOY1qzgoUTYs1pOV OTzQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuapPLmKZIg3AFn09Y2FPbDrFMqE1fNDT9lCtml9k0hms4BxCrzy BZyHvGBvQEnPGc4iDhAlZq4I/aGfh8dN7RHvU4FYZowmUuU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IbcvnQ6Ub7wmzGimDhzCxVeodlhCEhMYgDKx63GJIisTRK3G+broioymMtprhnykyNpqeye9GdnO/F6uLK1kw4= X-Received: by 2002:a25:5582:: with SMTP id j124mr2930332ybb.2.1550148422183; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 04:47:02 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190213112619.23899-1-zajec5@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 13:46:51 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] brcmfmac: use bphy_err() in all wiphy-related code To: Arend Van Spriel Cc: Kalle Valo , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , "open list:BROADCOM BRCM80211 IEEE802.11n WIRELESS DRIVER" , "open list:BROADCOM BRCM80211 IEEE802.11n WIRELESS DRIVER ," , =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 14 Feb 2019 at 13:38, Arend Van Spriel wrote: > On 2/13/2019 12:26 PM, Rafa=C5=82 Mi=C5=82ecki wrote: > > From: Rafa=C5=82 Mi=C5=82ecki > > > > This recently added macro provides more meaningful error messages thank= s > > to identifying a specific wiphy. It's especially important on systems > > with few cards supported by the same (brcmfmac) driver. > > Acked-by: Arend van Spriel > > Signed-off-by: Rafa=C5=82 Mi=C5=82ecki > > --- > > I obviously couldn't hit & test all error cases. To perform some basic > > testing I added: > > bphy_err(wiphy, "test\n"); > > for every wiphy variable added by this patch & tested in on BCM4366. > > > > I got a lot of messages like: > > [ 2842.424524] ieee80211 phy1: brcmf_netdev_start_xmit: test > > [ 2842.434921] ieee80211 phy1: brcmf_msgbuf_txflow: test > > [ 2842.440275] ieee80211 phy1: brcmf_msgbuf_process_msgtype: test > > [ 2842.446141] ieee80211 phy1: brcmf_get_ifp: test > > so it seems to work correctly. > > I was thinking about fact that module name is no longer prefixed, but I > am not sure that is a bad thing here. I think including function name should allow identifying error message in 99,9% cases. If for some reason we want the "brcmfmac: " prefix, it should only take a simple change to the bphy_err() macro. > > .../broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/bcdc.c | 26 +++--- > > .../broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/common.c | 38 +++++---- > > .../broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/core.c | 78 ++++++++++------- > > .../broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/feature.c | 6 +- > > .../broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/fweh.c | 22 +++-- > > .../broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/fwil.c | 15 ++-- > > .../broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/fwsignal.c | 36 +++++--- > > .../broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/msgbuf.c | 65 ++++++++------ > > .../broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/p2p.c | 85 +++++++++++-------= - > > .../broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/pno.c | 22 +++-- > > .../broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/proto.c | 7 +- > > 11 files changed, 240 insertions(+), 160 deletions(-) > > [...] > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/core.c b/= drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/core.c > > index e772c0845638..2e0e2badfb80 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/core.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/core.c > > [...] > > > @@ -141,7 +142,8 @@ void brcmf_configure_arp_nd_offload(struct brcmf_if= *ifp, bool enable) > > > > static void _brcmf_set_multicast_list(struct work_struct *work) > > { > > - struct brcmf_if *ifp; > > + struct brcmf_if *ifp =3D container_of(work, struct brcmf_if, mult= icast_work); > > checkpatch complains about the length here. One little warning. I thought it may pass unnoticed ;) Let me fix that.