On Wed, 2015-08-26 at 21:07 -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 10:20:23AM -0600, Toshi Kani wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/nfit.c b/drivers/acpi/nfit.c
> index c3fe206..6993ff2 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/nfit.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/nfit.c
> @@ -701,12 +701,13 @@ static ssize_t flags_show(struct device *dev,
> {
> u16 flags = to_nfit_memdev(dev)->flags;
>
> - return sprintf(buf, "%s%s%s%s%s\n",
> - flags & ACPI_NFIT_MEM_SAVE_FAILED ? "save " :
> "",
> - flags & ACPI_NFIT_MEM_RESTORE_FAILED ? "restore
> " : "",
> - flags & ACPI_NFIT_MEM_FLUSH_FAILED ? "flush " :
> "",
> - flags & ACPI_NFIT_MEM_ARMED ? "arm " : "",
> - flags & ACPI_NFIT_MEM_HEALTH_OBSERVED ? "smart
> " : "");
> + return sprintf(buf, "%s%s%s%s%s%s\n",
> + flags & ACPI_NFIT_MEM_SAVE_FAILED ? "save_fail " : "",
> + flags & ACPI_NFIT_MEM_RESTORE_FAILED ? "restore_fail "
> : "",
> + flags & ACPI_NFIT_MEM_FLUSH_FAILED ? "flush_fail " :
> "",
> + flags & ACPI_NFIT_MEM_ARMED ? "not_arm " : "",
Assuming we do want to update these strings to be more friendly,
"not_armed" probably makes more sense than
"not_arm". Also applies to the
2nd hunk below.
Agreed. (Will update if this patch gets ever resurrected. :-)
> + flags & ACPI_NFIT_MEM_HEALTH_OBSERVED ? "smart_event
" > > : "",
> + flags & ACPI_NFIT_MEM_HEALTH_ENABLED ? "notify_enabled
> " : "");
> }
> static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(flags);
>
> @@ -834,11 +835,11 @@ static int acpi_nfit_register_dimms(struct
> acpi_nfit_desc *acpi_desc)
> continue;
>
> dev_info(acpi_desc->dev, "%s: failed: %s%s%s%s\n",
> - nvdimm_name(nvdimm),
> - mem_flags & ACPI_NFIT_MEM_SAVE_FAILED ? "save "
> : "",
> - mem_flags & ACPI_NFIT_MEM_RESTORE_FAILED ?
> "restore " : "",
> - mem_flags & ACPI_NFIT_MEM_FLUSH_FAILED ? "flush
> " : "",
> - mem_flags & ACPI_NFIT_MEM_ARMED ? "arm " : "");
> + nvdimm_name(nvdimm),
> + mem_flags & ACPI_NFIT_MEM_SAVE_FAILED ? "save_fail "
> : "",
> + mem_flags & ACPI_NFIT_MEM_RESTORE_FAILED ?
> "restore_fail ":"",
> + mem_flags & ACPI_NFIT_MEM_FLUSH_FAILED ? "flush_fail
> " : "",
> + mem_flags & ACPI_NFIT_MEM_ARMED ? "not_arm " : "");
While you're in here, is there a reason not to include the last two flags
(smart_event and notify_enabled) in this dev_info() output?
This dev_info() logs any failure in NVDIMM, and the last two flags are not
failure conditions.
Thanks,
-Toshi