Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: s5pv210: Use dev_err instead of pr_err in probe

[Viresh Kumar]

On 26-08-20, 18:00, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> dev_err() allows easily to identify the device printing the message so
> no need for __func__.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/s5pv210-cpufreq.c | 14 +++++---------
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/s5pv210-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/s5pv210-cpufreq.c
> index 7dccdb364fcf..911a655895d8 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/s5pv210-cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/s5pv210-cpufreq.c
> @@ -616,8 +616,7 @@ static int s5pv210_cpufreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  
>  	np = of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL, "samsung,s5pv210-clock");
>  	if (!np) {
> -		pr_err("%s: failed to find clock controller DT node\n",
> -			__func__);
> +		dev_err(dev, "failed to find clock controller DT node\n");
>  		result = -ENODEV;
>  		goto err_clock;
>  	}
> @@ -625,16 +624,14 @@ static int s5pv210_cpufreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	clk_base = of_iomap(np, 0);
>  	of_node_put(np);
>  	if (!clk_base) {
> -		pr_err("%s: failed to map clock registers\n", __func__);
> -		result = -EFAULT;

I have restored this back as it didn't look intentional.

Applied both. Thanks.

-- 
viresh