On 17-09-05 18:16:23, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Tue, Sep 05, 2017 at 03:39:49PM +0300, Petri Latvala wrote:
When no action is specified on the command line, print the usage help
text and exit with failure instead of SIGABRT. Fix some typos on the
usage text.
Keep the abort() call in places where they can only be reached by
expanding the tool and forgetting to handle new parameters, with an
error message printed.
CC: Ben Widawsky <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Petri Latvala <[email protected]>
---
tools/intel_l3_parity.c | 12 +++++++++---
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/intel_l3_parity.c b/tools/intel_l3_parity.c
index eb00c50..1a4fae5 100644
--- a/tools/intel_l3_parity.c
+++ b/tools/intel_l3_parity.c
@@ -172,9 +172,9 @@ static void usage(const char *name)
" -l, --list List the current L3
logs\n"
" -a, --clear-all Clear all disabled rows\n"
" -e, --enable Enable row, bank, subbank
(undo -d)\n"
- " -d, --disable=<row,bank,subbank> Disable row, bank, subbank
(inline arguments are deprecated. Please use -r, -b, -s instead\n"
- " -i, --inject [HSW only] Cause hardware
to inject a row errors\n"
- " -u, --uninject [HSW only] Turn off hardware
error injectection (undo -i)\n"
+ " -d, --disable=<row,bank,subbank> Disable row, bank, subbank
(inline arguments are deprecated. Please use -r, -b, -s instead)\n"
+ " -i, --inject [HSW only] Cause hardware
to inject a row error\n"
+ " -u, --uninject [HSW only] Turn off hardware
error injection (undo -i)\n"
+1 for fixing the typo.
I think we should be careful about using "HSW only". In fact I'm in favor of
removing what was already there because I honestly don't know which platforms
support this feature.
" -L, --listen Listen for uevent
errors\n",
name);
}
@@ -301,6 +301,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
action = c;
break;
default:
+ fprintf(stderr, "Internal error: Unhandled flag
%c\n", c);
abort();
}
}
@@ -374,7 +375,12 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
break;
case 'L':
break;
+ case '0':
+ /* No action given */
+ usage(argv[0]);
+ exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
Won't this print usage once per slice? Or am I misreading how the patch
applies ...
-Daniel
Looks wrong to me as well.
default:
+ fprintf(stderr, "Internal error: Unhandled action
%d\n", action);
abort();
}
}
--
2.9.3
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
--
Ben Widawsky, Intel Open Source Technology Center
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
