Hi Dave, On 8/25/20 12:36 PM, David Miller wrote:
From: Murali Karicheri <m-kariche...@ti.com> Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 13:01:00 -0400+ ret = cpsw_ale_del_vlan(cpsw->ale, vid, 0); + if (ret) + dev_err(priv->dev, "%s: failed %d: ret %d\n", + __func__, __LINE__, ret); + ret = cpsw_ale_del_ucast(cpsw->ale, priv->mac_addr, + HOST_PORT_NUM, ALE_VLAN, vid); + if (ret) + dev_err(priv->dev, "%s: failed %d: ret %d\n", + __func__, __LINE__, ret); + ret = cpsw_ale_del_mcast(cpsw->ale, priv->ndev->broadcast, + 0, ALE_VLAN, vid); + if (ret) + dev_err(priv->dev, "%s: failed %d: ret %d\n", + __func__, __LINE__, ret); cpsw_ale_flush_multicast(cpsw->ale, ALE_PORT_HOST, vid);These error messages are extremely unhelpful. You're calling three different functions, yet emitting basically the same __func__ for each of those cases. No user can send you a useful bug report immediately if they just have func and line. Please get rid of the "__func__" and "__line__" stuff completely, it's never advisable to ever use that in my opinion. Instead, describe which delete operation failed, optionally with the error return.
OK. I had considered your suggestion, but thought having a line number would be handy for a developer. Function name would be better. Will re-send with changes as you have suggested. -- Murali Karicheri Texas Instruments
