Re: [PATCH] perf: Fix "Track with sched_switch" test by not printing warnings in quiet mode

[Namhyung Kim]

On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 10:12 AM James Clark <james.clark@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 12/10/2022 17:50, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 4:13 AM James Clark <james.clark@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>> The test already supplies -q to run in quiet mode, so extend quiet mode
> >>> to perf_stdio__warning() and also ui__warning() for consistency.
> >
> > I'm not sure if suppressing the warnings with -q is a good thing.
> > Maybe we need to separate warning/debug messages from the output.
>
> I don't see the issue with warnings being suppressed in quiet mode as
> long as errors are still printed. In other cases warnings have already
> been suppressed by quiet mode and this site is the odd one out.
>
> What use case are you thinking of where someone explicitly adds -q but
> wants to see non fatal warnings?

I don't have any specific use case.  If it's already suppressed in other
cases, I'm fine with it.

Thanks,
Namhyung