[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190730155148.GA21985@kroah.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2019 17:51:48 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@...hat.com>,
Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] treewide: Remove dev_err() usage after
platform_get_irq()
On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 08:35:59AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Greg Kroah-Hartman (2019-07-29 23:49:17)
> > On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 10:38:44PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > > We don't need dev_err() messages when platform_get_irq() fails now that
> > > platform_get_irq() prints an error message itself when something goes
> > > wrong. Let's remove these prints with a simple semantic patch.
> > >
> > > // <smpl>
> > > @@
> > > expression ret;
> > > struct platform_device *E;
> > > @@
> > >
> > > ret =
> > > (
> > > platform_get_irq(E, ...)
> > > |
> > > platform_get_irq_byname(E, ...)
> > > );
> > >
> > > if ( \( ret < 0 \| ret <= 0 \) )
> > > {
> > > (
> > > -if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
> > > -{ ...
> > > -dev_err(...);
> > > -... }
> > > |
> > > ...
> > > -dev_err(...);
> > > )
> > > ...
> > > }
> > > // </smpl>
> > >
> > > While we're here, remove braces on if statements that only have one
> > > statement (manually).
> >
> > I like this, and I like patch 1/3, but this is going to conflict like
> > crazy all over the tree with who ever ends up taking it in their tree.
> >
> > Can you just break this up into per-subsystem pieces and send it through
> > those trees, and any remaining ones I can take, but at least give
> > maintainers a chance to take it.
>
> Ok. Let me resend just this patch broken up into many pieces.
Thanks.
> > You are also going to have to do a sweep every other release or so to
> > catch the stragglers.
>
> I was going to let the janitors do that.
We are all janitors :)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists