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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20190416125825.vkjjujxdls7rwnem@vireshk-mac-ubuntu> Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 18:28:25 +0530 From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> To: Mohan Kumar <mohankumar718@...il.com> Cc: rjw@...ysocki.net, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RESEND] drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c: This fixes the following checkpatch warning On 15-04-19, 14:03, Mohan Kumar wrote: > WARNING: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using function's name, in a > string > > Switch hardcoded function name with a reference to __func__ making the > code more maintainable > > Signed-off-by: Mohan Kumar <mohankumar718@...il.com> > --- > drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c | 19 +++++++++---------- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c > index c72258a..73bb2aa 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c > @@ -366,7 +366,7 @@ static u32 get_cur_val(const struct cpumask *mask, struct acpi_cpufreq_data *dat > > val = drv_read(data, mask); > > - pr_debug("get_cur_val = %u\n", val); > + pr_debug("%s = %u\n", __func__, val); > > return val; > } > @@ -378,7 +378,7 @@ static unsigned int get_cur_freq_on_cpu(unsigned int cpu) > unsigned int freq; > unsigned int cached_freq; > > - pr_debug("get_cur_freq_on_cpu (%d)\n", cpu); > + pr_debug("%s (%d)\n", __func__, cpu); > > policy = cpufreq_cpu_get_raw(cpu); > if (unlikely(!policy)) > @@ -458,8 +458,7 @@ static int acpi_cpufreq_target(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, > if (acpi_pstate_strict) { > if (!check_freqs(policy, mask, > policy->freq_table[index].frequency)) { > - pr_debug("acpi_cpufreq_target failed (%d)\n", > - policy->cpu); > + pr_debug("%s (%d)\n", __func__, policy->cpu); > result = -EAGAIN; > } > } > @@ -573,7 +572,7 @@ static int cpufreq_boost_down_prep(unsigned int cpu) > static int __init acpi_cpufreq_early_init(void) > { > unsigned int i; > - pr_debug("acpi_cpufreq_early_init\n"); > + pr_debug("%s\n", __func__); > > acpi_perf_data = alloc_percpu(struct acpi_processor_performance); > if (!acpi_perf_data) { > @@ -657,7 +656,7 @@ static int acpi_cpufreq_cpu_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) > static int blacklisted; > #endif > > - pr_debug("acpi_cpufreq_cpu_init\n"); > + pr_debug("%s\n", __func__); > > #ifdef CONFIG_SMP > if (blacklisted) > @@ -856,7 +855,7 @@ static int acpi_cpufreq_cpu_exit(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) > { > struct acpi_cpufreq_data *data = policy->driver_data; > > - pr_debug("acpi_cpufreq_cpu_exit\n"); > + pr_debug("%s\n", __func__); > > policy->fast_switch_possible = false; > policy->driver_data = NULL; > @@ -881,7 +880,7 @@ static int acpi_cpufreq_resume(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) > { > struct acpi_cpufreq_data *data = policy->driver_data; > > - pr_debug("acpi_cpufreq_resume\n"); > + pr_debug("%s\n", __func__); > > data->resume = 1; > > @@ -954,7 +953,7 @@ static int __init acpi_cpufreq_init(void) > if (cpufreq_get_current_driver()) > return -EEXIST; > > - pr_debug("acpi_cpufreq_init\n"); > + pr_debug("%s\n", __func__); > > ret = acpi_cpufreq_early_init(); > if (ret) > @@ -991,7 +990,7 @@ static int __init acpi_cpufreq_init(void) > > static void __exit acpi_cpufreq_exit(void) > { > - pr_debug("acpi_cpufreq_exit\n"); > + pr_debug("%s\n", __func__); > > acpi_cpufreq_boost_exit(); > Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> -- viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists