[PATCH v7 16/23] scsi: ufs: mediatek: Clean up logging prints

[AngeloGioacchino Del Regno]

Il 25/02/26 14:05, Nicolas Frattaroli ha scritto:
> On Tuesday, 24 February 2026 13:47:28 Central European Standard Time Peter Wang (王信友) wrote:
>> On Mon, 2026-02-16 at 14:37 +0100, Nicolas Frattaroli wrote:
>>>   drivers/ufs/host/ufs-mediatek.c | 99 ++++++++++++++++++-------------
>>> ----------
>>>   1 file changed, 43 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-mediatek.c b/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-
>>> mediatek.c
>>> index ecf16e82a326..2b1f26b55782 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-mediatek.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/ufs/host/ufs-mediatek.c
>>> [... snip ...]
>>> @@ -810,11 +806,11 @@ static void ufs_mtk_mcq_set_irq_affinity(struct
>>> ufs_hba *hba, unsigned int cpu)
>>>   	_cpu = (cpu == 0) ? 3 : cpu;
>>>   	ret = irq_set_affinity(irq, cpumask_of(_cpu));
>>>   	if (ret) {
>>> -		dev_err(hba->dev, "set irq %d affinity to CPU %d
>>> failed\n",
>>> +		dev_err(hba->dev, "setting irq %d affinity to CPU %d
>>> failed\n",
>>>   			irq, _cpu);
>>>   		return;
>>>   	}
>>> -	dev_info(hba->dev, "set irq %d affinity to CPU: %d\n", irq,
>>> _cpu);
>>> +	dev_dbg(hba->dev, "set irq %d affinity to CPU %d\n", irq,
>>> _cpu);
>>>
>>
>> Is it more appropriate to use dev_info for state changes or for setting
>> changes?
> 
> Is this information a user would want to see in their bootup log in
> every case? My understanding right now is no.
> 
>>> [... snip ...]
>>> @@ -1571,7 +1559,7 @@ static int ufs_mtk_device_reset(struct ufs_hba
>>> *hba)
>>>   	/* Some devices may need time to respond to rst_n */
>>>   	usleep_range(10000, 15000);
>>>   
>>> -	dev_info(hba->dev, "device reset done\n");
>>> +	dev_dbg(hba->dev, "device reset done\n");
>>>   
>>
>> Is it more appropriate to use dev_info for state changes or for setting
>> changes?
> 
> Depends on your view of what's useful information for the user.
> 
> I can change both of these back to _info if I have to send out a next
> revision, just to get this through though.
> 

Definitely don't change that back to dev_info() as this is debugging information
that spams the kernel log for no reason.

This has to be dev_dbg().

Regards,
Angelo

>>
>> Thanks
>> Peter
>>
> 
> 
> 
>