Re: [PATCH 05/11] mtd: nand: denali: remove "Spectra:" prefix from printk strings

[Boris Brezillon]

On Fri, 18 Nov 2016 17:42:55 +0900
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi Marek,
> 
> 
> 2016-11-13 6:35 GMT+09:00 Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@xxxxxxxxx>:
> > On 11/09/2016 05:35 AM, Masahiro Yamada wrote:  
> >> As far as I understood from the Kconfig menu deleted by commit
> >> be7f39c5ecf5 ("Staging: delete spectra driver"), the "Spectra" is
> >> specific to Intel Moorestown Platform.
> >>
> >> The Denali NAND controller IP is used for various SoCs such as
> >> Altera SOCFPGA, Socionext UniPhier, etc.  The platform specific
> >> strings are not preferred in this driver.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>  
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@xxxxxxxxx>
> >  
> >> ---
> >>
> >> As an ARM-SoC developer, I only need denali.c and denali_dt.c.
> >>
> >> I see some "Spectra:" in drivers/mtd/nand/denali_pci.c as well.
> >> I was not quite sure if they are needed or not.
> >> If desired, I can update this patch to remove them too.  
> >
> > Is anyone even using Denali on Intel now ?
> >  
> >>  drivers/mtd/nand/denali.c | 11 +++++------
> >>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/denali.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/denali.c
> >> index 80d3e26..78d795b 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/denali.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/denali.c
> >> @@ -402,7 +402,7 @@ static void get_hynix_nand_para(struct denali_nand_info *denali,
> >>               break;
> >>       default:
> >>               dev_warn(denali->dev,
> >> -                      "Spectra: Unknown Hynix NAND (Device ID: 0x%x).\n"
> >> +                      "Unknown Hynix NAND (Device ID: 0x%x).\n"
> >>                        "Will use default parameter values instead.\n",
> >>                        device_id);
> >>       }
> >> @@ -1458,7 +1458,7 @@ int denali_init(struct denali_nand_info *denali)
> >>        */
> >>       if (request_irq(denali->irq, denali_isr, IRQF_SHARED,
> >>                       DENALI_NAND_NAME, denali)) {
> >> -             pr_err("Spectra: Unable to allocate IRQ\n");
> >> +             dev_err(denali->dev, "Unable to request IRQ\n");
> >>               return -ENODEV;
> >>       }
> >>
> >> @@ -1495,7 +1495,7 @@ int denali_init(struct denali_nand_info *denali)
> >>       /* Is 32-bit DMA supported? */
> >>       ret = dma_set_mask(denali->dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(32));
> >>       if (ret) {
> >> -             pr_err("Spectra: no usable DMA configuration\n");
> >> +             dev_err(denali->dev, "no usable DMA configuration\n");
> >>               goto failed_req_irq;
> >>       }
> >>
> >> @@ -1503,7 +1503,7 @@ int denali_init(struct denali_nand_info *denali)
> >>                            mtd->writesize + mtd->oobsize,
> >>                            DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
> >>       if (dma_mapping_error(denali->dev, denali->buf.dma_buf)) {
> >> -             dev_err(denali->dev, "Spectra: failed to map DMA buffer\n");
> >> +             dev_err(denali->dev, "failed to map DMA buffer\n");  
> >
> > Nit: For consistency's sake, use Failed with capital F . Fix the "No
> > usable DMA ..." too.  
> 
> 
> Even if we fix those two, we still have some more printk strings
> that start with a lower case.
> 
> 
> line 177:  dev_err(denali->dev, "reset bank failed.\n");
> 
> line 699:  pr_err("timeout occurred, status = 0x%x, mask = 0x%x\n",
> 
> line 863:  dev_err(denali->dev, "unable to send pipeline command\n");
> 
> line 1074:  dev_err(denali->dev, "timeout on write_page (type = %d)\n",
> 
> line 1309:  pr_err(": unsupported command received 0x%x\n", cmd);
> 
> 
> 
> If you say "consistency's sake" and
> you are a big fan of capital letters instead of lower cases,
> will you send a patch that touches those globally?
> 
> 
> Your comments against this series are just about
> "upper cases vs lower cases".

It's not like your series was doing useful things either ;-), all I see
is a bunch of cleanup and cosmetic changes. I'm perfectly fine taking
the series, but Marek comments about 'Upper case vs Lower case' is
perfectly valid in regards to this kind of changes.

> 
> If I get more useful comments, I am happy to send v2.
> 
> But, at this moment, I see no good reason for v2
> because changing those two lines does not give us any consistency.
> 
>