From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=A5Gh=YR=lists.ozlabs.org=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@kernel.org>
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=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,
	MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no
	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 9A495CA9EAF
	for <linuxppc-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 11:20:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1706B2084C
	for <linuxppc-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 11:20:12 +0000 (UTC)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 1706B2084C
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org
Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3])
	by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46zPsv0CD7zDqV7
	for <linuxppc-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 22:20:03 +1100 (AEDT)
Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org;
 spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=suse.de
 (client-ip=195.135.220.15; helo=mx1.suse.de; envelope-from=msuchanek@suse.de;
 receiver=<UNKNOWN>)
Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org;
 dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de
Received: from mx1.suse.de (mx2.suse.de [195.135.220.15])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46zPpN1mqJzDqTl
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 22:16:58 +1100 (AEDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de
Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254])
 by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 350B1B203;
 Thu, 24 Oct 2019 11:16:53 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2019 13:16:51 +0200
From: Michal =?iso-8859-1?Q?Such=E1nek?= <msuchanek@suse.de>
To: Hari Bathini <hbathini@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/fadump: Remove duplicate message.
Message-ID: <20191024111651.GL938@kitsune.suse.cz>
References: <20190923075406.5854-1-msuchanek@suse.de>
 <20191023175651.24833-1-msuchanek@suse.de>
 <aa26db2d-48b5-5825-81ab-12ca491a9971@linux.ibm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <aa26db2d-48b5-5825-81ab-12ca491a9971@linux.ibm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: Mahesh Salgaonkar <mahesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
 linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
 Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org
Sender: "Linuxppc-dev"
 <linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org>

On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 04:08:08PM +0530, Hari Bathini wrote:
> 
> Michal, thanks for looking into this.
> 
> On 23/10/19 11:26 PM, Michal Suchanek wrote:
> > There is duplicate message about lack of support by firmware in
> > fadump_reserve_mem and setup_fadump. Due to different capitalization it
> > is clear that the one in setup_fadump is shown on boot. Remove the
> > duplicate that is not shown.
> 
> Actually, the message in fadump_reserve_mem() is logged. fadump_reserve_mem()
> executes first and sets fw_dump.fadump_enabled to `0`, if fadump is not supported.
> So, the other message in setup_fadump() doesn't get logged anymore with recent
> changes. The right thing to do would be to remove similar message in setup_fadump() instead.

I need to re-check with a recent kernel build. I saw the message from
setup_fadump and not the one from fadump_reserve_mem but not sure what
the platform init code looked like in the kernel I tested with.

Thanks

Michal