At Tue, 1 Jul 2014 11:54:24 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 7:30 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez > <mcg...@do-not-panic.com> wrote: > > From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcg...@suse.com> > > > > Now that the udev firmware loader is optional request_firmware() > > will not provide any information on the kernel ring buffer if > > direct firmware loading failed and udev firmware loading is disabled. > > If no information is needed request_firmware_direct() should be used > > for optional firmware, at which point drivers can take on the onus > > over informing of any failures, if udev firmware loading is disabled > > though we should at the very least provide some sort of information > > as when the udev loader was enabled by default back in the days. > > > > With this change with a simple firmware load test module [0]: > > > > Example output without FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER_FALLBACK > > > > platform fake-dev.0: Direct firmware load for fake.bin failed with error -2 > > > > Example without FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER_FALLBACK > > > > platform fake-dev.0: Direct firmware load for fake.bin failed with error -2 > > platform fake-dev.0: Falling back to user helper > > > > Without this change without FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER_FALLBACK we get no output > > logged upon failure. > > > > [0] https://github.com/mcgrof/fake-firmware-test.git > > > > Cc: Tom Gundersen <t...@jklm.no> > > Cc: Ming Lei <ming....@canonical.com> > > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> > > Cc: Abhay Salunke <abhay_salu...@dell.com> > > Cc: Stefan Roese <s...@denx.de> > > Cc: Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de> > > Cc: Kay Sievers <k...@vrfy.org> > > Cc: Takashi Iwai <ti...@suse.de> > > Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcg...@suse.com> > > --- > > > > drivers/base/firmware_class.c | 12 ++++++++---- > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c > > index 46ea5f4..23274d8 100644 > > --- a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c > > +++ b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c > > @@ -101,8 +101,10 @@ static inline long firmware_loading_timeout(void) > > #define FW_OPT_NOWAIT (1U << 1) > > #ifdef CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER > > #define FW_OPT_USERHELPER (1U << 2) > > +#define FW_OPT_FAIL_WARN 0 > > #else > > #define FW_OPT_USERHELPER 0 > > +#define FW_OPT_FAIL_WARN (1U << 3) > > #endif > > #ifdef CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER_FALLBACK > > #define FW_OPT_FALLBACK FW_OPT_USERHELPER > > @@ -1116,10 +1118,11 @@ _request_firmware(const struct firmware > > **firmware_p, const char *name, > > > > ret = fw_get_filesystem_firmware(device, fw->priv); > > if (ret) { > > - if (opt_flags & FW_OPT_USERHELPER) { > > + if (opt_flags & (FW_OPT_FAIL_WARN | FW_OPT_USERHELPER)) > > dev_warn(device, > > - "Direct firmware load failed with error > > %d\n", > > - ret); > > + "Direct firmware load for %s failed with > > error %d\n", > > + name, ret); > > Maybe the warning can be always printed out since > (FW_OPT_FAIL_WARN | FW_OPT_USERHELPER) should be > always true.
Yes, it'd be simpler. Let's reduce lines! :) Takashi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
