lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Apr]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v13 03/10] mux: minimal mux subsystem and gpio-based mux controller
From
Date
On Tue, 2017-04-18 at 23:53 +0200, Peter Rosin wrote:
> On 2017-04-18 13:44, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:59:50PM +0200, Peter Rosin wrote:
[]
> > > > > + ret = device_add(&mux_chip->dev);
> > > > > + if (ret < 0)
> > > > > + dev_err(&mux_chip->dev,
> > > > > + "device_add failed in mux_chip_register: %d\n", ret);
> > > >
> > > > Did you run checkpatch.pl in strict mode on this new file? Please do so :)
> > >
> > > I did, and did it again just to be sure, and I do not get any complaints.
> > > So, what's wrong?
> >
> > You list the function name in the printk string, it should complain
> > that __func__ should be used. Oh well, it's just a perl script, it
> > doesn't always catch everything.
> > isn't always correct :)
>
> Ah, ok.

Also, please use the checkpatch in -next as it has a
slightly better mechanism to identify functions and
uses in strings.

$ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl ~/1.patch
WARNING: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'mux_chip_register', this function's name, in a string
#302: FILE: drivers/mux/mux-core.c:134:
+ "device_add failed in mux_chip_register: %d\n", ret);


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-04-19 04:24    [W:0.502 / U:0.536 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site