From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtprelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0035.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3rdRdM3H30zDqrR for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 21:33:10 +1000 (AEST) Message-ID: <1467027183.1847.98.camel@perches.com> Subject: Re: powerpc/fadump: trivial fix of spelling mistake, clean up message From: Joe Perches To: Michael Ellerman , Colin Ian King , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Paul Mackerras , Jiri Kosina , Rasmus Villemoes , Andrew Morton , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 04:33:03 -0700 In-Reply-To: <1467026427.29808.4.camel@ellerman.id.au> References: <3rcf3g63Wnz9s5Q@ozlabs.org> <5771021E.3050305@canonical.com> <1467024695.1847.87.camel@perches.com> <1467026427.29808.4.camel@ellerman.id.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Mime-Version: 1.0 List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, 2016-06-27 at 21:20 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > On Mon, 2016-06-27 at 03:51 -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2016-06-27 at 11:38 +0100, Colin Ian King wrote: > > > > > > On 26/06/16 05:19, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, 2016-24-06 at 17:43:00 UTC, Colin King wrote: > > > > > > > > > > trivial fix to spelling mistake "rgistration" and minor clean up > > > > > of the printk error message > > > > Can you also: > > > >  - use pr_err() > > > >  - unsplit the message, ie. keep the string all on one line. > > > I can unsplit the string, but checkpatch will complain about that, so > > > I'm not sure if that's preferred or not. > > > > > > WARNING: line over 80 characters > > If the statement is wrapped after the format, > > then checkpatch shouldn't complain. > > > > pr_err("Failed to invalidate firmware-assisted dump registration. Unexpected error (%d).\n", > >        rc); > But that's not actually any more readable, so just ignore checkpatch in this > case IMHO. It's a guide, not the gospel. Absolutely.  Ignore checkpatch whenever appropriate. There are relatively few lines in kernel source that have printk arguments post format that extend beyond 80 columns though and standardization is also good. cheers back.