Fabio Estevam [off-list ref] writes:
Hi,
Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam <redacted>
Why I like having boot log, I don't like have too verbose boot logs. If
you add this, you have a good reason (I hope), but I can't know
it. There's no patch description. So, please give a patch with proper
explanation of why you need that. Anyway, having a proper patch
description is imho always a good idea.
Moreover, there's already good hint if you want to know if you're on to2
or to3. On rev < 3.0, you have this in logs:
VFP support v0.3: implementor 41 architecture 3 part 30 variant c rev 2
Turning off NEON support, detected broken NEON implementation
Arnaud
Hi Arnaud,
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 5:24 AM, Arnaud Patard [off-list ref] wrote:
Fabio Estevam [off-list ref] writes:
Hi,
quoted
Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam <redacted>
Why I like having boot log, I don't like have too verbose boot logs. If
you add this, you have a good reason (I hope), but I can't know
it. There's no patch description. So, please give a patch with proper
explanation of why you need that. Anyway, having a proper patch
description is imho always a good idea.
I think that printing the silicon version on boot is useful
information. Many issues are fixed in the latest silicon revision, so
while debugging mx51 issues it is good to know from the boot log if
someone is using the latest silicon version or not.
We currently do that on mx31/mx35 kernel, and I think it would be nice
to have this information for mx5 as well.
It is just a single line, so don?t believe it will add any significant overhead.
Moreover, there's already good hint if you want to know if you're on to2
or to3. On rev < 3.0, you have this in logs:
VFP support v0.3: implementor 41 architecture 3 part 30 variant c rev 2
Turning off NEON support, detected broken NEON implementation
Ok, but still I prefer one single line stating the CPU version explicitly.
Regards,
Fabio Estevam
On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 12:43:14PM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
Hi Arnaud,
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 5:24 AM, Arnaud Patard [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Fabio Estevam [off-list ref] writes:
Hi,
quoted
Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam <redacted>
Why I like having boot log, I don't like have too verbose boot logs. If
you add this, you have a good reason (I hope), but I can't know
it. There's no patch description. So, please give a patch with proper
explanation of why you need that. Anyway, having a proper patch
description is imho always a good idea.
I think that printing the silicon version on boot is useful
information. Many issues are fixed in the latest silicon revision, so
while debugging mx51 issues it is good to know from the boot log if
someone is using the latest silicon version or not.
+1
There is less useful information in the bootlog than this. Also, there's
the quiet option to not wait on the slow serial console.
Sascha
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |