[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZQlwD50FEZeeAMBQ@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2023 10:55:27 +0100
From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: Gavin Shan <gshan@...hat.com>
Cc: James Morse <james.morse@....com>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
loongarch@...ts.linux.dev, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev,
x86@...nel.org, Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@...wei.com>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
jianyong.wu@....com, justin.he@....com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 32/35] ACPI: add support to register CPUs based on
the _STA enabled bit
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 02:46:22PM +1000, Gavin Shan wrote:
> The message needs to be split up into multiple lines to make ./scripts/checkpatch.pl
> happy:
>
> pr_err_once(FW_BUG "CPU %u is online, but described "
> "as not present or disabled!\n", pr->id);
No. checkpatch is wrong on this point. Splitting the message like this
hurts debuggability, because the message can no longer be grepped for.
What James has done is perfectly fine.
--
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists