Re: [PATCH v3] panel: Use pr_err(...) rather than printk(KERN_ERR ...)

2012-07-12 Thread Toshiaki Yamane 
Ryan-san, Joe-san,

Thanks for your advice.
I will try re-create the patch again.

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Joe Perches  wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-07-12 at 15:22 +1000, Ryan Mallon wrote:
>> On 12/07/12 12:35, Toshiaki Yamane wrote:
>> > This change is inspired by checkpatch.
>>
>> Your changelog needs to describe all of the changes you are making. The
>> subject line only describes one. This patch is doing the following:
>>
>>  - Converting printk(KERN_ERR to pr_err
>>  - Adding __func__ prefixes to printk lines
>>  - Refactoring split printk strings onto a single line
>>
>> There are a few other printks in this file which could be converted to
>> pr_* to make the code more consistent. Perhaps a follow up patch?
>>
>> Typically for a sub-sequent version of a patch/series you should list
>> the changes since the last round. Put these below the --- so that they
>> don't become part of the change log, e.g.:
>>
>>   Signed-off-by: Your name/email here
>>   ---
>>
>>   Changes since v2:
>> - Some stuff
>>
>>   Changes since v1:
>> - Some other stuff
>>
>> Some more comments below.
>
> And ideally cc the people that gave you notes/comments
> on your previous patches too.
>



-- 

Regards,


 .
  .
...

Yamane Toshiaki

yamaneto...@gmail.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH v3] panel: Use pr_err(...) rather than printk(KERN_ERR ...)

2012-07-12 Thread Toshiaki Yamane 
Ryan-san, Joe-san,

Thanks for your advice.
I will try re-create the patch again.

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote:
 On Thu, 2012-07-12 at 15:22 +1000, Ryan Mallon wrote:
 On 12/07/12 12:35, Toshiaki Yamane wrote:
  This change is inspired by checkpatch.

 Your changelog needs to describe all of the changes you are making. The
 subject line only describes one. This patch is doing the following:

  - Converting printk(KERN_ERR to pr_err
  - Adding __func__ prefixes to printk lines
  - Refactoring split printk strings onto a single line

 There are a few other printks in this file which could be converted to
 pr_* to make the code more consistent. Perhaps a follow up patch?

 Typically for a sub-sequent version of a patch/series you should list
 the changes since the last round. Put these below the --- so that they
 don't become part of the change log, e.g.:

   Signed-off-by: Your name/email here
   ---

   Changes since v2:
 - Some stuff

   Changes since v1:
 - Some other stuff

 Some more comments below.

 And ideally cc the people that gave you notes/comments
 on your previous patches too.




-- 

Regards,


 .
  .
...

Yamane Toshiaki

yamaneto...@gmail.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH v3] panel: Use pr_err(...) rather than printk(KERN_ERR ...)

2012-07-11 Thread Joe Perches 
On Thu, 2012-07-12 at 15:22 +1000, Ryan Mallon wrote:
> On 12/07/12 12:35, Toshiaki Yamane wrote:
> > This change is inspired by checkpatch.
> 
> Your changelog needs to describe all of the changes you are making. The
> subject line only describes one. This patch is doing the following:
> 
>  - Converting printk(KERN_ERR to pr_err
>  - Adding __func__ prefixes to printk lines
>  - Refactoring split printk strings onto a single line
> 
> There are a few other printks in this file which could be converted to
> pr_* to make the code more consistent. Perhaps a follow up patch?
> 
> Typically for a sub-sequent version of a patch/series you should list
> the changes since the last round. Put these below the --- so that they
> don't become part of the change log, e.g.:
> 
>   Signed-off-by: Your name/email here
>   ---
> 
>   Changes since v2:
> - Some stuff
> 
>   Changes since v1:
> - Some other stuff
> 
> Some more comments below.

And ideally cc the people that gave you notes/comments
on your previous patches too.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH v3] panel: Use pr_err(...) rather than printk(KERN_ERR ...)

2012-07-11 Thread Ryan Mallon 
On 12/07/12 12:35, Toshiaki Yamane wrote:
> This change is inspired by checkpatch.

Your changelog needs to describe all of the changes you are making. The
subject line only describes one. This patch is doing the following:

 - Converting printk(KERN_ERR to pr_err
 - Adding __func__ prefixes to printk lines
 - Refactoring split printk strings onto a single line

There are a few other printks in this file which could be converted to
pr_* to make the code more consistent. Perhaps a follow up patch?

Typically for a sub-sequent version of a patch/series you should list
the changes since the last round. Put these below the --- so that they
don't become part of the change log, e.g.:

  Signed-off-by: Your name/email here
  ---

  Changes since v2:
- Some stuff

  Changes since v1:
- Some other stuff

Some more comments below.

~Ryan

> 
> Signed-off-by: Toshiaki Yamane 
> ---
>  drivers/staging/panel/panel.c |   42 +---
>  1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/panel/panel.c b/drivers/staging/panel/panel.c
> index 7365089..a6d71fd 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/panel/panel.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/panel/panel.c
> @@ -34,6 +34,8 @@
>   *
>   */
>  
> +#define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME ": " fmt
> +

If you are going to print __func__ on each line, you can do:

  #define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME "%s: " fmt, __func__

Do you really need to print the function name out everywhere though?

>  #include 
>  
>  #include 
> @@ -1987,10 +1989,9 @@ static struct logical_input *panel_bind_key(char 
> *name, char *press,
>   struct logical_input *key;
>  
>   key = kzalloc(sizeof(struct logical_input), GFP_KERNEL);
> - if (!key) {
> - printk(KERN_ERR "panel: not enough memory\n");
> + if (!key)
>   return NULL;
> - }
> +
>   if (!input_name2mask(name, >mask, >value, _mask_i,
>_mask_o)) {
>   kfree(key);
> @@ -2030,10 +2031,9 @@ static struct logical_input *panel_bind_callback(char 
> *name,
>   struct logical_input *callback;
>  
>   callback = kmalloc(sizeof(struct logical_input), GFP_KERNEL);
> - if (!callback) {
> - printk(KERN_ERR "panel: not enough memory\n");
> + if (!callback)
>   return NULL;
> - }
> +
>   memset(callback, 0, sizeof(struct logical_input));
>   if (!input_name2mask(name, >mask, >value,
>_mask_i, _mask_o))
> @@ -2110,10 +2110,8 @@ static void panel_attach(struct parport *port)
>   return;
>  
>   if (pprt) {
> - printk(KERN_ERR
> -"panel_attach(): port->number=%d parport=%d, "
> -"already registered !\n",
> -port->number, parport);
> + pr_err("%s: port->number=%d parport=%d, already registered !\n",
> +__func__, port->number, parport);

Nitpick - Could remove the space before the '!'. The original has it
that, so no big deal if you want to leave it.

>   return;
>   }
>  
> @@ -2122,16 +2120,14 @@ static void panel_attach(struct parport *port)
>  /*PARPORT_DEV_EXCL */
>  0, (void *));
>   if (pprt == NULL) {
> - pr_err("panel_attach(): port->number=%d parport=%d, "
> -"parport_register_device() failed\n",
> -port->number, parport);
> + pr_err("%s: port->number=%d parport=%d, 
> parport_register_device() failed\n",
> +__func__, port->number, parport);
>   return;
>   }
>  
>   if (parport_claim(pprt)) {
> - printk(KERN_ERR
> -"Panel: could not claim access to parport%d. "
> -"Aborting.\n", parport);
> + pr_err("%s: could not claim access to parport%d. Aborting.\n",
> +__func__, parport);
>   goto err_unreg_device;
>   }
>  
> @@ -2165,10 +2161,8 @@ static void panel_detach(struct parport *port)
>   return;
>  
>   if (!pprt) {
> - printk(KERN_ERR
> -"panel_detach(): port->number=%d parport=%d, "
> -"nothing to unregister.\n",
> -port->number, parport);
> + pr_err("%s: port->number=%d parport=%d, nothing to 
> unregister.\n",
> +__func__, port->number, parport);
>   return;
>   }
>  
> @@ -2278,8 +2272,8 @@ int panel_init(void)
>   init_in_progress = 1;
>  
>   if (parport_register_driver(_driver)) {
> - printk(KERN_ERR
> -"Panel: could not register with parport. Aborting.\n");
> + pr_err("%s: could not register with parport. Aborting.\n",
> +__func__);
>   return -EIO;
>   }
>  
> @@ -2291,8 +2285,8 @@ int

[PATCH v3] panel: Use pr_err(...) rather than printk(KERN_ERR ...)

2012-07-11 Thread Toshiaki Yamane 
This change is inspired by checkpatch.

Signed-off-by: Toshiaki Yamane 
---
 drivers/staging/panel/panel.c |   42 +---
 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/panel/panel.c b/drivers/staging/panel/panel.c
index 7365089..a6d71fd 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/panel/panel.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/panel/panel.c
@@ -34,6 +34,8 @@
  *
  */
 
+#define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME ": " fmt
+
 #include 
 
 #include 
@@ -1987,10 +1989,9 @@ static struct logical_input *panel_bind_key(char *name, 
char *press,
struct logical_input *key;
 
key = kzalloc(sizeof(struct logical_input), GFP_KERNEL);
-   if (!key) {
-   printk(KERN_ERR "panel: not enough memory\n");
+   if (!key)
return NULL;
-   }
+
if (!input_name2mask(name, >mask, >value, _mask_i,
 _mask_o)) {
kfree(key);
@@ -2030,10 +2031,9 @@ static struct logical_input *panel_bind_callback(char 
*name,
struct logical_input *callback;
 
callback = kmalloc(sizeof(struct logical_input), GFP_KERNEL);
-   if (!callback) {
-   printk(KERN_ERR "panel: not enough memory\n");
+   if (!callback)
return NULL;
-   }
+
memset(callback, 0, sizeof(struct logical_input));
if (!input_name2mask(name, >mask, >value,
 _mask_i, _mask_o))
@@ -2110,10 +2110,8 @@ static void panel_attach(struct parport *port)
return;
 
if (pprt) {
-   printk(KERN_ERR
-  "panel_attach(): port->number=%d parport=%d, "
-  "already registered !\n",
-  port->number, parport);
+   pr_err("%s: port->number=%d parport=%d, already registered !\n",
+  __func__, port->number, parport);
return;
}
 
@@ -2122,16 +2120,14 @@ static void panel_attach(struct parport *port)
   /*PARPORT_DEV_EXCL */
   0, (void *));
if (pprt == NULL) {
-   pr_err("panel_attach(): port->number=%d parport=%d, "
-  "parport_register_device() failed\n",
-  port->number, parport);
+   pr_err("%s: port->number=%d parport=%d, 
parport_register_device() failed\n",
+  __func__, port->number, parport);
return;
}
 
if (parport_claim(pprt)) {
-   printk(KERN_ERR
-  "Panel: could not claim access to parport%d. "
-  "Aborting.\n", parport);
+   pr_err("%s: could not claim access to parport%d. Aborting.\n",
+  __func__, parport);
goto err_unreg_device;
}
 
@@ -2165,10 +2161,8 @@ static void panel_detach(struct parport *port)
return;
 
if (!pprt) {
-   printk(KERN_ERR
-  "panel_detach(): port->number=%d parport=%d, "
-  "nothing to unregister.\n",
-  port->number, parport);
+   pr_err("%s: port->number=%d parport=%d, nothing to 
unregister.\n",
+  __func__, port->number, parport);
return;
}
 
@@ -2278,8 +2272,8 @@ int panel_init(void)
init_in_progress = 1;
 
if (parport_register_driver(_driver)) {
-   printk(KERN_ERR
-  "Panel: could not register with parport. Aborting.\n");
+   pr_err("%s: could not register with parport. Aborting.\n",
+  __func__);
return -EIO;
}
 
@@ -2291,8 +2285,8 @@ int panel_init(void)
pprt = NULL;
}
parport_unregister_driver(_driver);
-   printk(KERN_ERR "Panel driver version " PANEL_VERSION
-  " disabled.\n");
+   pr_err("%s: Panel driver version " PANEL_VERSION " disabled.\n",
+  __func__);
return -ENODEV;
}
 
-- 
1.7.5.4

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[PATCH v3] panel: Use pr_err(...) rather than printk(KERN_ERR ...)

2012-07-11 Thread Toshiaki Yamane 
This change is inspired by checkpatch.

Signed-off-by: Toshiaki Yamane yamaneto...@gmail.com
---
 drivers/staging/panel/panel.c |   42 +---
 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/panel/panel.c b/drivers/staging/panel/panel.c
index 7365089..a6d71fd 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/panel/panel.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/panel/panel.c
@@ -34,6 +34,8 @@
  *
  */
 
+#define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME :  fmt
+
 #include linux/module.h
 
 #include linux/types.h
@@ -1987,10 +1989,9 @@ static struct logical_input *panel_bind_key(char *name, 
char *press,
struct logical_input *key;
 
key = kzalloc(sizeof(struct logical_input), GFP_KERNEL);
-   if (!key) {
-   printk(KERN_ERR panel: not enough memory\n);
+   if (!key)
return NULL;
-   }
+
if (!input_name2mask(name, key-mask, key-value, scan_mask_i,
 scan_mask_o)) {
kfree(key);
@@ -2030,10 +2031,9 @@ static struct logical_input *panel_bind_callback(char 
*name,
struct logical_input *callback;
 
callback = kmalloc(sizeof(struct logical_input), GFP_KERNEL);
-   if (!callback) {
-   printk(KERN_ERR panel: not enough memory\n);
+   if (!callback)
return NULL;
-   }
+
memset(callback, 0, sizeof(struct logical_input));
if (!input_name2mask(name, callback-mask, callback-value,
 scan_mask_i, scan_mask_o))
@@ -2110,10 +2110,8 @@ static void panel_attach(struct parport *port)
return;
 
if (pprt) {
-   printk(KERN_ERR
-  panel_attach(): port-number=%d parport=%d, 
-  already registered !\n,
-  port-number, parport);
+   pr_err(%s: port-number=%d parport=%d, already registered !\n,
+  __func__, port-number, parport);
return;
}
 
@@ -2122,16 +2120,14 @@ static void panel_attach(struct parport *port)
   /*PARPORT_DEV_EXCL */
   0, (void *)pprt);
if (pprt == NULL) {
-   pr_err(panel_attach(): port-number=%d parport=%d, 
-  parport_register_device() failed\n,
-  port-number, parport);
+   pr_err(%s: port-number=%d parport=%d, 
parport_register_device() failed\n,
+  __func__, port-number, parport);
return;
}
 
if (parport_claim(pprt)) {
-   printk(KERN_ERR
-  Panel: could not claim access to parport%d. 
-  Aborting.\n, parport);
+   pr_err(%s: could not claim access to parport%d. Aborting.\n,
+  __func__, parport);
goto err_unreg_device;
}
 
@@ -2165,10 +2161,8 @@ static void panel_detach(struct parport *port)
return;
 
if (!pprt) {
-   printk(KERN_ERR
-  panel_detach(): port-number=%d parport=%d, 
-  nothing to unregister.\n,
-  port-number, parport);
+   pr_err(%s: port-number=%d parport=%d, nothing to 
unregister.\n,
+  __func__, port-number, parport);
return;
}
 
@@ -2278,8 +2272,8 @@ int panel_init(void)
init_in_progress = 1;
 
if (parport_register_driver(panel_driver)) {
-   printk(KERN_ERR
-  Panel: could not register with parport. Aborting.\n);
+   pr_err(%s: could not register with parport. Aborting.\n,
+  __func__);
return -EIO;
}
 
@@ -2291,8 +2285,8 @@ int panel_init(void)
pprt = NULL;
}
parport_unregister_driver(panel_driver);
-   printk(KERN_ERR Panel driver version  PANEL_VERSION
-   disabled.\n);
+   pr_err(%s: Panel driver version  PANEL_VERSION  disabled.\n,
+  __func__);
return -ENODEV;
}
 
-- 
1.7.5.4

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH v3] panel: Use pr_err(...) rather than printk(KERN_ERR ...)

2012-07-11 Thread Ryan Mallon 
On 12/07/12 12:35, Toshiaki Yamane wrote:
 This change is inspired by checkpatch.

Your changelog needs to describe all of the changes you are making. The
subject line only describes one. This patch is doing the following:

 - Converting printk(KERN_ERR to pr_err
 - Adding __func__ prefixes to printk lines
 - Refactoring split printk strings onto a single line

There are a few other printks in this file which could be converted to
pr_* to make the code more consistent. Perhaps a follow up patch?

Typically for a sub-sequent version of a patch/series you should list
the changes since the last round. Put these below the --- so that they
don't become part of the change log, e.g.:

  Signed-off-by: Your name/email here
  ---

  Changes since v2:
- Some stuff

  Changes since v1:
- Some other stuff

Some more comments below.

~Ryan

 
 Signed-off-by: Toshiaki Yamane yamaneto...@gmail.com
 ---
  drivers/staging/panel/panel.c |   42 +---
  1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
 
 diff --git a/drivers/staging/panel/panel.c b/drivers/staging/panel/panel.c
 index 7365089..a6d71fd 100644
 --- a/drivers/staging/panel/panel.c
 +++ b/drivers/staging/panel/panel.c
 @@ -34,6 +34,8 @@
   *
   */
  
 +#define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME :  fmt
 +

If you are going to print __func__ on each line, you can do:

  #define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME %s:  fmt, __func__

Do you really need to print the function name out everywhere though?

  #include linux/module.h
  
  #include linux/types.h
 @@ -1987,10 +1989,9 @@ static struct logical_input *panel_bind_key(char 
 *name, char *press,
   struct logical_input *key;
  
   key = kzalloc(sizeof(struct logical_input), GFP_KERNEL);
 - if (!key) {
 - printk(KERN_ERR panel: not enough memory\n);
 + if (!key)
   return NULL;
 - }
 +
   if (!input_name2mask(name, key-mask, key-value, scan_mask_i,
scan_mask_o)) {
   kfree(key);
 @@ -2030,10 +2031,9 @@ static struct logical_input *panel_bind_callback(char 
 *name,
   struct logical_input *callback;
  
   callback = kmalloc(sizeof(struct logical_input), GFP_KERNEL);
 - if (!callback) {
 - printk(KERN_ERR panel: not enough memory\n);
 + if (!callback)
   return NULL;
 - }
 +
   memset(callback, 0, sizeof(struct logical_input));
   if (!input_name2mask(name, callback-mask, callback-value,
scan_mask_i, scan_mask_o))
 @@ -2110,10 +2110,8 @@ static void panel_attach(struct parport *port)
   return;
  
   if (pprt) {
 - printk(KERN_ERR
 -panel_attach(): port-number=%d parport=%d, 
 -already registered !\n,
 -port-number, parport);
 + pr_err(%s: port-number=%d parport=%d, already registered !\n,
 +__func__, port-number, parport);

Nitpick - Could remove the space before the '!'. The original has it
that, so no big deal if you want to leave it.

   return;
   }
  
 @@ -2122,16 +2120,14 @@ static void panel_attach(struct parport *port)
  /*PARPORT_DEV_EXCL */
  0, (void *)pprt);
   if (pprt == NULL) {
 - pr_err(panel_attach(): port-number=%d parport=%d, 
 -parport_register_device() failed\n,
 -port-number, parport);
 + pr_err(%s: port-number=%d parport=%d, 
 parport_register_device() failed\n,
 +__func__, port-number, parport);
   return;
   }
  
   if (parport_claim(pprt)) {
 - printk(KERN_ERR
 -Panel: could not claim access to parport%d. 
 -Aborting.\n, parport);
 + pr_err(%s: could not claim access to parport%d. Aborting.\n,
 +__func__, parport);
   goto err_unreg_device;
   }
  
 @@ -2165,10 +2161,8 @@ static void panel_detach(struct parport *port)
   return;
  
   if (!pprt) {
 - printk(KERN_ERR
 -panel_detach(): port-number=%d parport=%d, 
 -nothing to unregister.\n,
 -port-number, parport);
 + pr_err(%s: port-number=%d parport=%d, nothing to 
 unregister.\n,
 +__func__, port-number, parport);
   return;
   }
  
 @@ -2278,8 +2272,8 @@ int panel_init(void)
   init_in_progress = 1;
  
   if (parport_register_driver(panel_driver)) {
 - printk(KERN_ERR
 -Panel: could not register with parport. Aborting.\n);
 + pr_err(%s: could not register with parport. Aborting.\n,
 +__func__);
   return -EIO;
   }
  
 @@ -2291,8 +2285,8 @@ int panel_init(void)
   pprt = NULL;
   }

Re: [PATCH v3] panel: Use pr_err(...) rather than printk(KERN_ERR ...)

2012-07-11 Thread Joe Perches 
On Thu, 2012-07-12 at 15:22 +1000, Ryan Mallon wrote:
 On 12/07/12 12:35, Toshiaki Yamane wrote:
  This change is inspired by checkpatch.
 
 Your changelog needs to describe all of the changes you are making. The
 subject line only describes one. This patch is doing the following:
 
  - Converting printk(KERN_ERR to pr_err
  - Adding __func__ prefixes to printk lines
  - Refactoring split printk strings onto a single line
 
 There are a few other printks in this file which could be converted to
 pr_* to make the code more consistent. Perhaps a follow up patch?
 
 Typically for a sub-sequent version of a patch/series you should list
 the changes since the last round. Put these below the --- so that they
 don't become part of the change log, e.g.:
 
   Signed-off-by: Your name/email here
   ---
 
   Changes since v2:
 - Some stuff
 
   Changes since v1:
 - Some other stuff
 
 Some more comments below.

And ideally cc the people that gave you notes/comments
on your previous patches too.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/