[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <20160127021214.GG14296@samsunx.samsung>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 11:12:14 +0900
From: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...sung.com>
To: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>,
rtc-linux@...glegroups.com, Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>,
linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 07/10] rtc: max77686: Use dev_warn() instead of pr_warn()
> >> if (tm->tm_year < 100) {
> >>- pr_warn("RTC can't handle year %d. Assume it's 2000.\n",
> >>- 1900 + tm->tm_year);
> >>+ dev_warn(info->dev,
> >>+ "RTC can't handle year %d. Assume it's 2000\n",
> >>+ 1900 + tm->tm_year);
> >> return -EINVAL;
> >
> >Because we are returning an error value, why not use dev_err()?
> >
>
> You are absolutely right. Since the driver was using pr_warn(), I used
> dev_warn() but dev_err() would had been correct.
>
> If you don't mind I plan to do it as a follow up patch to avoid having
> to resend the whole series only for this change.
Fine for me!
Andi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists