Messages in this thread | | | From | Andrzej Krzysztofowicz <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] drivers/net/others | Date | Thu, 24 May 2001 14:01:14 +0200 (CEST) |
| |
> Thanks for your impressive clean-up patch. I have a couple of comments > regarding your clean-up of the dmfe.c driver.
Thanks for your response.
> On Thu, 24 May 2001, Andrzej Krzysztofowicz wrote: > > > @@ -395,7 +395,7 @@ > > u32 dev_rev, pci_pmr; > > > > if (!printed_version++) > > - printk(version); > > + printk("%s", version); > > > > DMFE_DBUG(0, "dmfe_init_one()", 0); > > > > Could you please explain the purpose of this change? To me it looks less > efficient in both performance and memory usage.
Basically I also preferred to avoid the extra string here. But Alan suggests it may cause problems while somebody wants to add a literal % to the version string. Moreover, IMHO it is better to have a standard here, i.e. either all drivers contain the format or none does.
If you still complain, I'll drop this change.
> > @@ -2024,8 +2027,10 @@ > > { > > int rc; > > > > - printk(version); > > +#ifdef MODULE > > + printk("s", version); > > printed_version = 1; > > +#endif /* MODULE */ > > > > DMFE_DBUG(0, "init_module() ", debug); > > > > Whoups... And why did you add the ifdef, btw?
AFAIK module_init becomes __initcall while compiled into kernel. So it is called (IMO) always and the previous "version" printing (around line 400) would never be executed (printed_version == 1). And we do not want to print version for built-in drivers which do not detect hardware, do we ?
Andrzej
-- ======================================================================= Andrzej M. Krzysztofowicz ankry@mif.pg.gda.pl tel. (0-58) 347 14 61 Wydz.Fizyki Technicznej i Matematyki Stosowanej Politechniki Gdanskiej - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |