lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Aug]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] acpi: fan.c: printk replacement
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:45:20AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, August 22, 2014 05:33:21 PM Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> > printk replaced with corresponding dev_err and dev_info
> > fixed one broken user-visible string
> > multiine comment edited for correct commenting style
> > asm/uaccess.h replaced with linux/uaccess.h
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip@vectorindia.org>
> > ---
> > drivers/acpi/fan.c | 18 +++++++++---------
> > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/fan.c b/drivers/acpi/fan.c
> > index 8acf53e..7900d55 100644
> > --- a/drivers/acpi/fan.c
> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/fan.c
> > @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@
> > #include <linux/module.h>
> > #include <linux/init.h>
> > #include <linux/types.h>
> > -#include <asm/uaccess.h>
> > +#include <linux/uaccess.h>
> > #include <linux/thermal.h>
> > #include <linux/acpi.h>
> >
> > @@ -127,8 +127,9 @@ static const struct thermal_cooling_device_ops fan_cooling_ops = {
> > };
> >
> > /* --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > - Driver Interface
> > - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- */
> > + * Driver Interface
> > + * --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > +*/
> >
> > static int acpi_fan_add(struct acpi_device *device)
> > {
> > @@ -143,7 +144,7 @@ static int acpi_fan_add(struct acpi_device *device)
> >
> > result = acpi_bus_update_power(device->handle, NULL);
> > if (result) {
> > - printk(KERN_ERR PREFIX "Setting initial power state\n");
> > + dev_err(&device->dev, PREFIX "Setting initial power state\n");
>
> While at it, please define a proper pr_fmt() for this file and get rid of PREFIX
> too.
>
> Otherwise I don't see a compelling reason to apply this.
>

Hi,
Since in the patch I am not using any pr_* , so I am unable to understand why you are asking for a proper pr_fmt().
I can get rid of the PREFIX . Then should I use pr_* in the patch instead of dev_* ?
My understanding was dev_* is more preffered than pr_*.
waiting for your suggestion on this.

thanks
sudip


> >
>
> --
> I speak only for myself.
> Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-08-26 17:41    [W:0.078 / U:0.124 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site