On Wed, 2014-11-26 at 16:19 +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 10:59:25AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
On Tue, 2014-11-25 at 11:51 +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
problems with this way:
- macro name is little misleading - macro says printk, but we are using dev_dbg
- if some one later wants to add something to this file, and doesnot want to use the variable name korg1212 in his function.
any suggestions ?
Some code is so old and unlikely to be ever used again, it may be better to move it to an "ancient and crufty" folder and forget about it.
This may be one of those.
If the debugging was written in a more current style, it might look like this: (with various format/argument mismatches fixed, formatting changes, etc)
ok. and can't we delete some of the messages like "DSP download is complete." and then printing the statename. there are lots of messages like that which is just printing the function name and the statename ..
Dunno. Maybe somebody cares about the state of the dsp download, but I doubt it as I suspect the hardware isn't used much.
and, even if i modify it a little and send it, most of the work has been done by you. so how do i send the patch in your name or add your name in the patch ? I have not done anything so my name should not be there.
<shrug> you started it.
I spend a couple minutes running a couple scripts.
I don't have the hardware, I've never looked at that code before, do what you think appropriate.