[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1701231300240.3435@hadrien>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 13:00:35 +0100 (CET)
From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
cc: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:HARDWARE MONITORING" <linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] hwmon: (lm70) Utilize dev_warn instead of pr_warn
On Sun, 22 Jan 2017, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Sun, 2017-01-22 at 22:43 -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> > Two questions for Julia Lawall:
> >
> > o is there a better way to do this than repeat the blocks
> > one for each replacement
> > o can struct device * dev be made an arbitrary identifier
> >
> > $ cat dev_printk.cocci
> > @@
> > identifier fn;
> > type T;
> > @@
> >
> > T fn ( ..., struct device * dev, ... ) {
> > <...
> > - pr_emerg(
> > + dev_emerg(dev,
> > ...);
> > ...>
> > }
>
> Well, the second question is simple if I would just
> think a little before asking...
>
> @@
> identifier fn;
> identifier dev;
Yes :)
julia
> type T;
> @@
>
> T fn ( ..., struct device * dev, ... ) {
> <...
> - pr_emerg(
> + dev_emerg(dev,
> ...);
> ...>
> }
>
> etc...
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists