Hi Rob,
Tivy, Robert <rtivy@...> writes:
> As I was going through board-da850-evm.c I came to suspect that the reason
> some of the function names were
> hardcoded was because the printed function name did not match the actual
> function name from where the
> pr_*() was called and because the author perhaps wanted them all to appear as
> though they originated from
> da850_evm_init() (and I believe all those functions are called by only
> da850_evm_init()). The pr_*()
> calls that actually do originate in da850_evm_init() can certainly have more
> compact strings by using
> pr_warn("%s ...", __func__), but I wonder about the others.
I suspect that's just a cut-n-paste error.
> Do you still recommend changing all of them to use __func__, or just the ones
> that have hardcoded function
> names that match the calling function?
Just changing hardcoded names to __func__ for the prints you are touching
because of the issue in subject is okay. Not need to add function name to
prints that dont have a function name at all though.
Another thing I forgot to ask last time, can you split the patch to
handle all files
separately? It will be easier to merge that way, especially I want to keep the
board changes separate from soc changes.
> > While sending patches using git-send-email, please send 1/2 and 2/2
> > together. This will make them appear in the same thread.
>
> I used "sendmail" with some header fields manually added to a git-produced
> patch file. How does one cause
> two separate emails to appear in the same thread?
I guess ultimately, the In-Reply-To: header of the reply should be same as
the Message-ID: of original mail.
Thanks,
Sekhar
_______________________________________________
Davinci-linux-open-source mailing list
[email protected]
http://linux.davincidsp.com/mailman/listinfo/davinci-linux-open-source
