| Message ID | 1385264221-29952-1-git-send-email-santosh.shilimkar@ti.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 10:37:01PM -0500, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: > Otherwise prints would truncate the variables on LPAE machines. > > Cc: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com> > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> > Signed-off-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> > --- > drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c | 9 ++++----- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c b/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c > index 165c2c2..b303a98 100644 > --- a/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c > +++ b/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c > @@ -201,9 +201,8 @@ int __init dma_contiguous_reserve_area(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t base, > phys_addr_t alignment; > int ret = 0; > > - pr_debug("%s(size %lx, base %08lx, limit %08lx)\n", __func__, > - (unsigned long)size, (unsigned long)base, > - (unsigned long)limit); > + pr_info("%s(size %pa, base %pa, limit %pa)\n", __func__, > + &size, &base, &limit); Why did you change the logging level of this message?
On Saturday 23 November 2013 10:43 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 10:37:01PM -0500, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: >> Otherwise prints would truncate the variables on LPAE machines. >> >> Cc: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com> >> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> >> Signed-off-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> >> --- >> drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c | 9 ++++----- >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c b/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c >> index 165c2c2..b303a98 100644 >> --- a/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c >> +++ b/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c >> @@ -201,9 +201,8 @@ int __init dma_contiguous_reserve_area(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t base, >> phys_addr_t alignment; >> int ret = 0; >> >> - pr_debug("%s(size %lx, base %08lx, limit %08lx)\n", __func__, >> - (unsigned long)size, (unsigned long)base, >> - (unsigned long)limit); >> + pr_info("%s(size %pa, base %pa, limit %pa)\n", __func__, >> + &size, &base, &limit); > > Why did you change the logging level of this message? > Opps... That was accidental. Will post updated version. regards, Santosh
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 10:37:01PM -0500, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: > @@ -250,8 +249,8 @@ int __init dma_contiguous_reserve_area(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t base, > *res_cma = cma; > cma_area_count++; > > - pr_info("CMA: reserved %ld MiB at %08lx\n", (unsigned long)size / SZ_1M, > - (unsigned long)base); > + pr_info("CMA: reserved %ld MiB at %pa\n", (unsigned long)size / SZ_1M, > + &base); Why is this pr_info() at all? That's just noise, please move it to pr_debug(). thanks, greg k-h
On Saturday 23 November 2013 10:44 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 10:37:01PM -0500, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: >> @@ -250,8 +249,8 @@ int __init dma_contiguous_reserve_area(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t base, >> *res_cma = cma; >> cma_area_count++; >> >> - pr_info("CMA: reserved %ld MiB at %08lx\n", (unsigned long)size / SZ_1M, >> - (unsigned long)base); >> + pr_info("CMA: reserved %ld MiB at %pa\n", (unsigned long)size / SZ_1M, >> + &base); > > Why is this pr_info() at all? That's just noise, please move it to > pr_debug(). > Marek can comment better but I think its useful print to know CMA reserved memory size. regards, Santosh
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 10:45:37PM -0500, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: > On Saturday 23 November 2013 10:44 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 10:37:01PM -0500, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: > >> @@ -250,8 +249,8 @@ int __init dma_contiguous_reserve_area(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t base, > >> *res_cma = cma; > >> cma_area_count++; > >> > >> - pr_info("CMA: reserved %ld MiB at %08lx\n", (unsigned long)size / SZ_1M, > >> - (unsigned long)base); > >> + pr_info("CMA: reserved %ld MiB at %pa\n", (unsigned long)size / SZ_1M, > >> + &base); > > > > Why is this pr_info() at all? That's just noise, please move it to > > pr_debug(). > > > Marek can comment better but I think its useful print to know CMA > reserved memory size. Useful to who?
On Saturday 23 November 2013 11:10 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 10:45:37PM -0500, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: >> On Saturday 23 November 2013 10:44 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >>> On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 10:37:01PM -0500, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: >>>> @@ -250,8 +249,8 @@ int __init dma_contiguous_reserve_area(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t base, >>>> *res_cma = cma; >>>> cma_area_count++; >>>> >>>> - pr_info("CMA: reserved %ld MiB at %08lx\n", (unsigned long)size / SZ_1M, >>>> - (unsigned long)base); >>>> + pr_info("CMA: reserved %ld MiB at %pa\n", (unsigned long)size / SZ_1M, >>>> + &base); >>> >>> Why is this pr_info() at all? That's just noise, please move it to >>> pr_debug(). >>> >> Marek can comment better but I think its useful print to know CMA >> reserved memory size. > > Useful to who? > Useful to anyone wants to know the CMA usage on a platform. CMA size is configurable and platforms tend to use different sizes based on needs. The info don't appear in /proc/meminfo, so probably dmsg grep is easy enough to know how much CMA memory being used on a platform. That was my point. I don't have strong argument here against not making it pr_debug but was waiting for Marek's opinion on it. Regards, Santosh
Hi, On 2013-11-24 05:28, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: > On Saturday 23 November 2013 11:10 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 10:45:37PM -0500, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: > >> On Saturday 23 November 2013 10:44 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > >>> On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 10:37:01PM -0500, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: > >>>> @@ -250,8 +249,8 @@ int __init dma_contiguous_reserve_area(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t base, > >>>> *res_cma = cma; > >>>> cma_area_count++; > >>>> > >>>> - pr_info("CMA: reserved %ld MiB at %08lx\n", (unsigned long)size / SZ_1M, > >>>> - (unsigned long)base); > >>>> + pr_info("CMA: reserved %ld MiB at %pa\n", (unsigned long)size / SZ_1M, > >>>> + &base); > >>> > >>> Why is this pr_info() at all? That's just noise, please move it to > >>> pr_debug(). > >>> > >> Marek can comment better but I think its useful print to know CMA > >> reserved memory size. > > > > Useful to who? > > > Useful to anyone wants to know the CMA usage on a platform. > CMA size is configurable and platforms tend to use different sizes > based on needs. The info don't appear in /proc/meminfo, so probably > dmsg grep is easy enough to know how much CMA memory being used on > a platform. That was my point. > > I don't have strong argument here against not making it pr_debug > but was waiting for Marek's opinion on it. If possible I would like to keep pr_info. It already helped me a lot while analyzing someone's logs to find why memory allocation failed. A simple search for "CMA" messages enabled me to quickly check if CMA has been enabled and configured properly or not. It also gives a curious user some information about the memory configuration (especially if he don't need CMA, he will investigate why kernel has reserved so much memory). Best regards
diff --git a/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c b/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c index 165c2c2..b303a98 100644 --- a/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c +++ b/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c @@ -201,9 +201,8 @@ int __init dma_contiguous_reserve_area(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t alignment; int ret = 0; - pr_debug("%s(size %lx, base %08lx, limit %08lx)\n", __func__, - (unsigned long)size, (unsigned long)base, - (unsigned long)limit); + pr_info("%s(size %pa, base %pa, limit %pa)\n", __func__, + &size, &base, &limit); /* Sanity checks */ if (cma_area_count == ARRAY_SIZE(cma_areas)) { @@ -250,8 +249,8 @@ int __init dma_contiguous_reserve_area(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t base, *res_cma = cma; cma_area_count++; - pr_info("CMA: reserved %ld MiB at %08lx\n", (unsigned long)size / SZ_1M, - (unsigned long)base); + pr_info("CMA: reserved %ld MiB at %pa\n", (unsigned long)size / SZ_1M, + &base); /* Architecture specific contiguous memory fixup. */ dma_contiguous_early_fixup(base, size);
Otherwise prints would truncate the variables on LPAE machines. Cc: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> Signed-off-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> --- drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c | 9 ++++----- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)