Re: [PATCH] staging: iio: fix coding style

[Jonathan Cameron]

On April 14, 2014 2:59:32 PM GMT+01:00, "JoÃl Porquet" <joel@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>On Saturday, April 12, 2014 06:28:07 PM Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>> 
>> On 09/04/14 19:09, Joel Porquet wrote:
>> > As suggested by checkpatch.pl, use dev_info() instead of
>> > printk(KERN_INFO ...) to print message.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Joel Porquet <joel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > ---
>> > Only tested by compilation.
>> >   drivers/staging/iio/trigger/iio-trig-periodic-rtc.c | 3 ++-
>> >   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/iio/trigger/iio-trig-periodic-rtc.c
>b/drivers/staging/iio/trigger/iio-trig-periodic-rtc.c
>> > index 48a6afa..38ecb4b 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/staging/iio/trigger/iio-trig-periodic-rtc.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/staging/iio/trigger/iio-trig-periodic-rtc.c
>> > @@ -33,7 +33,8 @@ static int iio_trig_periodic_rtc_set_state(struct
>iio_trigger *trig, bool state)
>> >   	struct iio_prtc_trigger_info *trig_info =
>iio_trigger_get_drvdata(trig);
>> >   	if (trig_info->frequency == 0)
>> >   		return -EINVAL;
>> > -	printk(KERN_INFO "trigger frequency is %d\n",
>trig_info->frequency);
>> > +	dev_info(&trig_info->rtc->dev, "trigger frequency is %d\n",
>> > +			trig_info->frequency);
>> The principle is good, but why make the error message us the
>underlying rtc device?
>> Going to lead to a rather unhelpful error message.
>> 
>> Perhaps the iio_trigger structures device element would make more
>sense?
>> Might not be terribly informative, but will at least come from the
>right
>> subsystem.
>> 
>> Also, I think we will be dropping this driver entirely at some point.
>> It was a dodgy hack that perhaps made sense at the time, but now a
>high
>> resolution timer is going to give better results.
>
>OK, thanks for the feedback!
>
>Does that still make sense that I resubmit another patch (using
>iio_trigger-dev instead)?
>Or should I just drop this patch altogether since you seem to say that
>patching this driver is not really worth it anyway?
Up to you. Nothing wrong with setting a good example even in code we aim ultimately
 drop the code! I doubt we will do it for a cycle or two yet
>
>> >   	return rtc_irq_set_state(trig_info->rtc, &trig_info->task,
>state);
>> >   }
>> >
>> >
>> 
>--
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in
>the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/