Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 30 Jul 2019 17:51:48 +0200 | From | Greg Kroah-Hartman <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] treewide: Remove dev_err() usage after platform_get_irq() |
| |
On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 08:35:59AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: > Quoting Greg Kroah-Hartman (2019-07-29 23:49:17) > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 10:38:44PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > > We don't need dev_err() messages when platform_get_irq() fails now that > > > platform_get_irq() prints an error message itself when something goes > > > wrong. Let's remove these prints with a simple semantic patch. > > > > > > // <smpl> > > > @@ > > > expression ret; > > > struct platform_device *E; > > > @@ > > > > > > ret = > > > ( > > > platform_get_irq(E, ...) > > > | > > > platform_get_irq_byname(E, ...) > > > ); > > > > > > if ( \( ret < 0 \| ret <= 0 \) ) > > > { > > > ( > > > -if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER) > > > -{ ... > > > -dev_err(...); > > > -... } > > > | > > > ... > > > -dev_err(...); > > > ) > > > ... > > > } > > > // </smpl> > > > > > > While we're here, remove braces on if statements that only have one > > > statement (manually). > > > > I like this, and I like patch 1/3, but this is going to conflict like > > crazy all over the tree with who ever ends up taking it in their tree. > > > > Can you just break this up into per-subsystem pieces and send it through > > those trees, and any remaining ones I can take, but at least give > > maintainers a chance to take it. > > Ok. Let me resend just this patch broken up into many pieces.
Thanks.
> > You are also going to have to do a sweep every other release or so to > > catch the stragglers. > > I was going to let the janitors do that.
We are all janitors :)
| |