[PATCH][WAS:bcmai, axi] bcma: add Broadcom specific AMBA bus driver

Rafał Miłecki zajec5 at gmail.com
Sat May 7 15:21:46 EDT 2011

2011/5/7 George Kashperko <george at znau.edu.ua>:
>> >>
>> >> The purpose is ridiculously trivial. Print user-friendly names on
>> >> scanning. Why not do that?
>> > Output like
>> > Core 0: ChipCommon (id 0x800, rev 18, vendor 0x14e4)
>> > and
>> > Core 0: id 0x800, rev 18, vendor 0x14e4
>> > both give to 99% of linux systems' end-users exactly the same consistent
>> > information. Its more than enough for diagnostic purposes (I guess
>> > scanning code does outputs this for diagnostic purposes by those less
>> > than 1% of people who are aware wth is actually that ChipCommon is, not
>> > to be just user friendly?).
>> Really, what's wrong with that? Does it kill anyone's pet we print
>> this? We also do:
>> pr_err("Scanning failed because of wrong CID\n");
>> return -1;
>> While we could drop pr_err. Why to do this? Advanced used can always
>> check what -1 means.
>> I just like this. I find situations when it's useful, while I don't
>> see real negatives. I want to keep this. Can we leave this that way?
>> Unless someone finds some really bad effects of this?
> Nothing wrong except it makes kernel larger while gives _absolutely_ no
> benefit to end users. Regardless bus code prints core name or not it
> (core name) have absolutely no impact on driver matching.
> Imagine yourself an end-user who haven't got his 80211 core matched with
> driver and therefore he haven't got WiFi working.
> If bus driver code outputs
> Core X: id 0x812, rev. 8, vendor 0x4BF
> you (as end user) will look where is 0x4BF/0x812 driver supporting
> rev.8.
> But if bus driver code outputs
> Core X: MAC 802.11 (core id 0x812, rev. 8, vendor 0x4BF)
> you (as end user) empowered with MAC 802.11 name knowledge will still
> look where is 0x4BF/0x812 driver supporting rev.8.

I'll ask linux-wireless instead of linux-usb or linux-arm.

I didn't expect longer discussion so I got this trivial example of
pr_err. But it appears to be good example/question.

How do you see relation between bcma_device_name and:
int zd_ioread32v_locked(...) {
	if (r) {
			  "error: zd_ioread16v_locked. Error number %d\n", r);
		return r;

I believe according to your theory we should drop thi error message,
right? It eats memory to keep this string while error code can always
be checked in source.


More information about the b43-dev mailing list