[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Zd9wkwdcftftIIK5@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 19:42:43 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>
Cc: Chris Down <chris@...isdown.name>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>, Jim Cromie <jim.cromie@...il.com>,
Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@...il.com>, Xiubo Li <xiubli@...hat.com>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] Simplify net_dbg_ratelimited() dummy
On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 03:05:02PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> There is no need to wrap calls to the no_printk() helper inside an
> always-false check, as no_printk() already does that internally.
This also makes sense.
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists