lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Aug]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: staging: ks7010: Replace three printk() calls by pr_err()
    From
    Date
    On Sat, 2016-08-13 at 13:10 +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
    > > > Prefer usage of the macro "pr_err" over the interface "printk".
    > > Not correct
    > A checkpatch warning like "PREFER_PR_LEVEL" can point additional possibilities out
    > for this use case.
    > Would you like to introduce any of the higher level logging functions instead?

    I think pr_<level> is OK if reworking the code
    to support dev_<level> is not easy.

    > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks7010_sdio.c b/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks7010_sdio.c
    > > []
    > > >
    > > > @@ -998,11 +998,11 @@ static int ks7010_sdio_probe(struct sdio_func *func,
    > > >   /* private memory allocate */
    > > >   netdev = alloc_etherdev(sizeof(*priv));
    > > >   if (netdev == NULL) {
    > > > - printk(KERN_ERR "ks7010 : Unable to alloc new net device\n");
    > > > + pr_err(pr_fmt("Unable to alloc new net device\n"));
    > > All of these pr_fmt uses are redundant as pr_err already does pr_fmt
    > Thanks for your reminder.
    >
    > Would you accept that another update will be appended to the discussed patch series?

    No.  Patches should not knowingly introduce defects
    that are corrected in follow-on patches.

    > > alloc_etherdev already does a dump_stack so the OOM isn't useful.
    > Does this information indicate that this printk() (or pr_err()) call
    > should be deleted?

    Markus, I don't know if it's your lack of English
    comprehension or not, but it's fairly obvious from
    my reply that this line should be deleted, either
    in this patch or a follow-on.

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2016-09-17 09:56    [W:3.383 / U:0.732 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site