linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Staging: unisys: visorbus: Fix coding style warning from checkpatch.pl.

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: <CAH6sp9PQc6Ahjfwq_8da6jaXBTUtYkvd0dqLevpQWKFt2WAFEw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 28 Jun 2017 10:29:48 +0200
From:   Frans Klaver <fransklaver@...il.com>
To:     Quytelda Kahja <quytelda@...alin.org>
Cc:     david.kershner@...sys.com, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        driverdevel <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Staging: unisys: visorbus: Fix coding style warning from checkpatch.pl.

Hi,

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 4:49 AM, Quytelda Kahja <quytelda@...alin.org> wrote:
> Replace the literal function name "visorbus_create_instance" with the format
> specifier "%s" so it can be dynamically filled by the __func__ macro.

On a general note, I think the actual change or effect is more import
to mention in the subject than the fact that you "fix some issue
highlighted by checkpatch".

Something like

Subject: [PATCH] staging: unisys: visorbus: use __func__ instead of
function name

Of course you can still mention that checkpatch highlighted the issue
for you in the description.

>
> Signed-off-by: Quytelda Kahja <quytelda@...alin.org>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/visorbus_main.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/visorbus_main.c b/drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/visorbus_main.c
> index 1c785dd19ddd..1c6dc3a3e64a 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/visorbus_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/visorbus_main.c
> @@ -1030,7 +1030,7 @@ visorbus_create_instance(struct visor_device *dev)
>  err_debugfs_dir:
>         debugfs_remove_recursive(dev->debugfs_dir);
>         kfree(hdr_info);
> -       dev_err(&dev->device, "visorbus_create_instance failed: %d\n", err);
> +       dev_err(&dev->device, "%s failed: %d\n", __func__, err);
>         return err;
>  }

It looks sane, anyway.

Frans