From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::241; helo=mail-it0-x241.google.com; envelope-from=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org Received: from mail-it0-x241.google.com (mail-it0-x241.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::241]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A87B82114A6C4 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 05:15:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it0-x241.google.com with SMTP id l6-v6so3030925iti.2 for ; Tue, 05 Jun 2018 05:15:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=+KjtV+1awL344L0Tis5bh3lpEVyREUD+T2IYgI5L+yI=; b=RF2n6edRTp7A+erqt0DO7CDASk18jfZqTmCx3lyC3hAMS9HWSy36L1DaFTOZUNT+w7 TxOyqKQnE82VhA1Z6BWtxQ84RfHjAGBkywi/llgwxGkk9ufp1yp9o1F3c6DMDybPzNuL GMktmm9XGbAGuenwyN/oIYi1RcgGtDdBNStcE= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=+KjtV+1awL344L0Tis5bh3lpEVyREUD+T2IYgI5L+yI=; b=s73DEo2V5jnuCvSJU21m806+07LK3hW14572SbdyQSKrYSPJpHFzynj3oNjaP1khO0 iM5udM1lNYw1GGqn1r+u8sZh2E5+/C5cxBb26JapizBajuxjmgn+XYieQ3MQcJJMR7Hw b04jPp0z7ZjuG5UK5HbVEySmosNJYZ0TTD1yvE6rJfJjZWwCiokCQmjJvwGzX39QLLP0 rsrkWjvW5qlqsQg/yHxciw25P+nvCfF9KcX+FJDD1JvWiN5GjOU07tncWYYEuAq//ZT8 OE+9Ltlulor6CSm2/quraKircQquIvvQWg1KkUXUDyA0P9FVDK4ec5bEGrOQC4ukMx1U tc/w== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E1Ht2gxaE7lgivQlw/7XjfXlVVp8VDuWCNbM5lIXeo31lABvh3n LoV+Ybl9LMetOGUfECvGrddzvUiQfFGFs/YYOH49RA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKIJ3ewrwVFTtRv+K9gFCbFHZkRQcF1ntPo8s48qUIQTSykHEkLjvfoDAcO/e4sPZUYLiUH1FvkjgEgGGbtB8wU= X-Received: by 2002:a24:1d0e:: with SMTP id 14-v6mr8096011itj.50.1528200925739; Tue, 05 Jun 2018 05:15:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a6b:bb86:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Jun 2018 05:15:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <39667f5d35144426ace434f9dbd9adf6@SOC-EX03V.e01.socionext.com> References: <39667f5d35144426ace434f9dbd9adf6@SOC-EX03V.e01.socionext.com> From: Ard Biesheuvel Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 14:15:25 +0200 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?B?UGlwYXQv44Oh44K/44Ov44OL44OD44OI44Od44OzIOODlOODkeODg+ODiA==?= Cc: "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" , Ruiyu Ni , Eric Dong , "Zeng, Star" Subject: Re: MdeModulePkg/Bus/Sd/EmmcDxe: Too verbose debug print on read X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2018 12:15:26 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On 5 June 2018 at 13:45, wrote: > Hi, > > My team is developing a board booting Linux from an on-board eMMC, > and we find that EmmcReadWrite() debug print is too verbose for INFO level. > > // https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/blob/master/MdeModulePkg/Bus/Sd/EmmcDxe/EmmcBlockIo.c#L904 > DEBUG ((EFI_D_INFO, "Emmc%a(): Part %d Lba ... > > Is this an intended level? > I wonder if the level should be `DEBUG_BLKIO` instead. > I agree. I noticed the same, when loading GRUB, kernel and initrd from eMMC, a significant amount of time is spent in these debug prints