linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 22/41] drivers: tty: serial: cpm

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]

Date:   Tue, 30 Apr 2019 17:10:29 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
Cc:     "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <info@...ux.net>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lorenzo.pieralisi@....com,
        linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
        andrew@...id.au, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, sudeep.holla@....com,
        liviu.dudau@....com, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, vz@...ia.com,
        linux@...sktech.co.nz, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
        khilman@...libre.com, macro@...ux-mips.org,
        slemieux.tyco@...il.com, matthias.bgg@...il.com, jacmet@...site.dk,
        linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 22/41] drivers: tty: serial: cpm_uart: fix logging calls

On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 05:59:04PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> Le 27/04/2019 à 14:52, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult a écrit :
> > Fix checkpatch warnings by using pr_err():
> > 
> >      WARNING: Prefer [subsystem eg: netdev]_err([subsystem]dev, ... then dev_err(dev, ... then pr_err(...  to printk(KERN_ERR ...
> >      #109: FILE: drivers/tty/serial/cpm_uart/cpm_uart_cpm2.c:109:
> >      +		printk(KERN_ERR
> > 
> >      WARNING: Prefer [subsystem eg: netdev]_err([subsystem]dev, ... then dev_err(dev, ... then pr_err(...  to printk(KERN_ERR ...
> >      #128: FILE: drivers/tty/serial/cpm_uart/cpm_uart_cpm2.c:128:
> >      +		printk(KERN_ERR
> > 
> >      WARNING: Prefer [subsystem eg: netdev]_err([subsystem]dev, ... then dev_err(dev, ... then pr_err(...  to printk(KERN_ERR ...
> >      +           printk(KERN_ERR
> > 
> >      WARNING: Prefer [subsystem eg: netdev]_err([subsystem]dev, ... then dev_err(dev, ... then pr_err(...  to printk(KERN_ERR ...
> >      +           printk(KERN_ERR
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt <info@...ux.net>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
> 
> But is that really worth doing those changes ?
> 
> If we want to do something useful, wouldn't it make more sense to introduce
> the use of dev_err() in order to identify the faulting device in the message
> ?

+1 for switching to dev_*().

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko