On Mon, 22 Apr 2013, Vinod Koul wrote: > On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 11:14:55AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Mon, 22 Apr 2013, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 11:12:03AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > Now we know the total of physical and logical channels, we may as > > > > well report them within the information log. > > > > > > > > Before: > > > > dma40 dma40.0: hardware revision: 3 @ 0x801c0000 with 8 physical > > > > channels > > > > > > > > After: > > > > <as above ...> and 256 logical channels > > > > > > > > Cc: Vinod Koul <[email protected]> > > > > Cc: Dan Williams <[email protected]> > > > > Cc: Per Forlin <[email protected]> > > > > Cc: Rabin Vincent <[email protected]> > > > > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <[email protected]> > > > > --- > > > > drivers/dma/ste_dma40.c | 5 +++-- > > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/dma/ste_dma40.c b/drivers/dma/ste_dma40.c > > > > index 282dd59..805049c 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/dma/ste_dma40.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/dma/ste_dma40.c > > > > @@ -3200,8 +3200,9 @@ static struct d40_base * __init > > > > d40_hw_detect_init(struct platform_device *pdev) > > > > > > > > num_log_chans = num_phy_chans * D40_MAX_LOG_CHAN_PER_PHY; > > > > > > > > - dev_info(&pdev->dev, "hardware revision: %d @ 0x%x with %d > > > > physical channels\n", > > > > - rev, res->start, num_phy_chans); > > > > + dev_info(&pdev->dev, "hardware revision: %d @ 0x%x with " > > > > + "%d physical channels and %d logical channels\n", > > > > + rev, res->start, num_phy_chans, num_log_chans); > > > Splitting log messages across lines is bad idea and sacrifces > > > readablity... also > > > wasnt splitting logging to multiple lines emit checkpatch warn > > > > You also get a check-patch error if your lines are over 80 chars. > No, you get a warn
You only get a warning for this too: WARNING: quoted string split across lines #33: FILE: drivers/dma/ste_dma40.c:3204: + dev_info(&pdev->dev, "hardware revision: %d @ 0x%x with " + "%d physical channels and %d logical channels\n", > > How would you solve this? > Use common sense :) I would never sacrfice readablity of code. Erring on > 80chars > is fine by me as long as it makes sense. Common sense to me says split a string which goes over 100 chars. :) ... and I don't think readability is compromised all that much, if at all. But you're the maintainer. I'll go with whatever you decide. -- Lee Jones Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
