linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] [Trivial] qib: fix an incorrect message

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1342724170.28019.23.camel@ejdallLaptop>
Date:	Thu, 19 Jul 2012 12:56:10 -0600
From:	Betty Dall <betty.dall@...com>
To:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:	trivial@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, infinipath@...gic.com,
	roland@...nel.org, sean.hefty@...el.com, hal.rosenstock@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [Trivial] qib: fix an incorrect message

Hi Joe,

Thanks for the comment Joe. It looks like Roland already accepted the
trivial change.

On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 11:03 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:34 -0600, Betty Dall wrote:
> > There is a cut and paste typo in the function qib_pci_slot_reset() where
> > it prints that the "link_reset" function is called rather than the
> > "slot_reset" function. This makes the message misleading.
> 
> Hi Betty.
> 
> > diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/qib/qib_pcie.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/qib/qib_pcie.c
> []
> > @@ -725,7 +725,7 @@ qib_pci_mmio_enabled(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> >  static pci_ers_result_t
> >  qib_pci_slot_reset(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> >  {
> > -	qib_devinfo(pdev, "QIB link_reset function called, ignored\n");
> > +	qib_devinfo(pdev, "QIB slot_reset function called, ignored\n");
> 
> These sorts of typos can be avoided by using "%s: ", __func__
> 
> 	qib_devinfo(pdev, "QIB %s: called, ignored\n", __func__);


You are right about using __func__. That is what I use typically too. In
this file, none of the qib_devinfo() messages use __func__, so I stuck
with the trivial change for consistency. I could write another patch
that makes use of __func__ for all the appropriate qib_devinfo() calls
(there are 4 of them.) Do you think that is a worthwhile change? BTW, I
did review all the other qib_devinfo() calls to make sure they are using
the correct function names, and they look good.

-Betty


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