On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 04:43:03PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
At Wed, 10 Sep 2014 20:02:04 +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 03:57:04PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 19:21 +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
as pr_* macros are more preffered over printk, so printk replaced with corresponding pr_* macros.
Are you simply running checkpatch on every file and decided to do something about it? :)
i am running checkpatch on the patch generated. if i am doing checkpatch cleanups then that i do it only in the staging. only exception : printk .. :)
I'll let Takashi decide whether to take this or not as I no longer care about this code, but IMHO this changes is completely pointless since you don't also clean up the code to have a common prefix with #define pr_fmt and then clean up the callers etc.
i mentioned in the comment that in a future patch we can have pr_fmt, it was not done in this patch since the changes for this patch is generated by a script and not manually. if Takashi accepts this then the next patch will have pr_fmt.
If you're going to work on it, please give a patch series and let me merge once. There is no good merit to merge a half-baked piece by piece.
Regarding the changes you've made: so far, I've merged two such patches just because it's a good exercise for newbies. You've played it and experienced it enough. So it's time to go up to a higher stage, more "real" fixes.
can you please give me some hint of fixes that can be attempted by newbies. except printk :) so far i have started with fixing the sparse warnings in staging.
For example, if you are still interested in printk stuff, try to change the calls to dev_err() and co. Of course, this needs more understanding of the code you'll handle, which object is passed for which messages.
sure , i will send you this one.
thanks sudip
thanks,
Takashi