Hello Stephen,
On 25.11.20 03:17, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Ahmad Fatoum (2020-11-13 06:53:09)
>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/imx/clk-imx6q.c b/drivers/clk/imx/clk-imx6q.c
>> index ba33c79158de..b2e4b6234ac0 100644
>> --- a/drivers/clk/imx/clk-imx6q.c
>> +++ b/drivers/clk/imx/clk-imx6q.c
>> @@ -337,10 +337,10 @@ static void init_ldb_clks(struct device_node *np, void
>> __iomem *ccm_base)
>> of_assigned_ldb_sels(np, &sel[0][3], &sel[1][3]);
>>
>> for (i = 0; i < 2; i++) {
>> - /* Warn if a glitch might have been introduced already */
>> + /* Print a notice if a glitch might have been introduced
>> already */
>> if (sel[i][0] != 3) {
>> - pr_warn("ccm: ldb_di%d_sel already changed from
>> reset value: %d\n",
>> - i, sel[i][0]);
>> + pr_notice("ccm: ldb_di%d_sel already changed from
>> reset value: %d\n",
>
> Maybe the print should also say "Possible glitch"?
Somehow missed this reply completely.
Yes, adding "possible glitch" improves the usefulness of the message,
I just sent out a v2.
Thanks,
Ahmad
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
