On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 04:04:49PM +0300, Sam Protsenko wrote: > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 3:53 PM, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 01:09:12AM +0300, Sam Protsenko wrote: > > > >> This is just a draft to discuss ideas related to "Make U-Boot log great > >> again" thread. > >> > >> With this patch we will see something like: > >> > >> Loading Environment from FAT... > >> --> MMC: no card present > >> --> ** Bad device mmc 0 ** > >> --> Failed (-5) > >> Loading Environment from MMC... > >> --> OK > >> > >> instead of: > >> > >> Loading Environment from FAT... MMC: no card present > >> ** Bad device mmc 0 ** > >> Failed (-5) > >> Loading Environment from MMC... OK > > > > So, I think maybe (and given Wolfgang's comments) we should think about > > how the output might want to look, and how to get there without GD > > changes. Perhaps: > > Attempting to load Environment from FAT (do we have more easily > > available info at this point?): > > Which exactly info do you mean?
Do we easily know things like what device / partition we're trying? Or only "env type is $X" ? > > MMC: no card present > > ** Bad device mmc 0 ** > > Failed (-5) > > Loading Environment from MMC... > > Attempting to load Environment from MMC: > > Succeeded > > > > What do you think if we add some prefix to first message, like: > > ---> Attempting to load Environment from FAT: > MMC: no card present > ** Bad device mmc 0 ** > Failed (-5) > Loading Environment from MMC... > ---> Attempting to load Environment from MMC: > Succeeded > > just to emphasize that possible errors are belong to prefixed line? > Does it seem better or more ugly to you? I don't know. I'm not a fan, but I don't always have the best taste. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
