From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
To: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] mfd: dm355evm_msp: Refactoring for add_child()
Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2016 15:36:15 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160809153615.GU5243@dell> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a0ac69be-b3a1-d33a-d13e-825fb26bfee9@users.sourceforge.net>
On Tue, 09 Aug 2016, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> > But the change-log in this patch says "I did some stuff".
> > What stuff did you change? Which review comments did you
> > tend to?
>
> I imagine that I could increase the description granularity
> to a detail level which you might also not like.
Right. A certain level of common sense needs to be exercised.
> >>>> +put_device:
> >>>> + platform_device_put(pdev);
> >>>> + dev_err(&client->dev, "failed to add device %s\n", name);
> >>>
> >>> ... and remove this line.
> >>
> >> Do you really want that this error message should be deleted?
> >>
> >> How does this response fit to your request to introduce such a message
> >> for the function "add_numbered_child" (on 2016-06-08)?
> >> https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1162299.html
> >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/6/8/467
> >
> > You've lost the context.
>
> I interpreted the suggested message adjustments as separate changes.
> So I wondered about a different handling for the Linux modules
> "dm355evm_msp" and "twl-core".
In what way? The coding standards should be the same.
> > The "..." is meant to intimate that it
> > follows on from a previous comment. In this case:
> >
> >> > status = platform_device_add_data(pdev, pdata, pdata_len);
> >> > if (status < 0) {
> >> > dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "can't add platform_data\n");
> >>
> >> Please take the opportunity to convert these to dev_err()s.
> >
> > So, convert the specific dev_dbg() calls to dev_err() and remove the
> > contentless one at the bottom.
>
> It seems then that you would like to get rid of an error message
> at the end while increasing the importance of a related information.
Yes. Remove the pointless error message at the bottom and provide an
informative one, describing why things went wrong. Remember; common
sense often prevails.
--
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
To: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] mfd: dm355evm_msp: Refactoring for add_child()
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 16:36:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160809153615.GU5243@dell> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a0ac69be-b3a1-d33a-d13e-825fb26bfee9@users.sourceforge.net>
On Tue, 09 Aug 2016, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> > But the change-log in this patch says "I did some stuff".
> > What stuff did you change? Which review comments did you
> > tend to?
>
> I imagine that I could increase the description granularity
> to a detail level which you might also not like.
Right. A certain level of common sense needs to be exercised.
> >>>> +put_device:
> >>>> + platform_device_put(pdev);
> >>>> + dev_err(&client->dev, "failed to add device %s\n", name);
> >>>
> >>> ... and remove this line.
> >>
> >> Do you really want that this error message should be deleted?
> >>
> >> How does this response fit to your request to introduce such a message
> >> for the function "add_numbered_child" (on 2016-06-08)?
> >> https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1162299.html
> >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/6/8/467
> >
> > You've lost the context.
>
> I interpreted the suggested message adjustments as separate changes.
> So I wondered about a different handling for the Linux modules
> "dm355evm_msp" and "twl-core".
In what way? The coding standards should be the same.
> > The "..." is meant to intimate that it
> > follows on from a previous comment. In this case:
> >
> >> > status = platform_device_add_data(pdev, pdata, pdata_len);
> >> > if (status < 0) {
> >> > dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "can't add platform_data\n");
> >>
> >> Please take the opportunity to convert these to dev_err()s.
> >
> > So, convert the specific dev_dbg() calls to dev_err() and remove the
> > contentless one at the bottom.
>
> It seems then that you would like to get rid of an error message
> at the end while increasing the importance of a related information.
Yes. Remove the pointless error message at the bottom and provide an
informative one, describing why things went wrong. Remember; common
sense often prevails.
--
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-09 15:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-01 17:29 [PATCH v4] mfd: dm355evm_msp: Refactoring for add_child() SF Markus Elfring
2016-07-01 17:29 ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-08-05 7:55 ` Lee Jones
2016-08-05 7:55 ` Lee Jones
2016-08-08 11:36 ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-08-08 11:36 ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-08-09 9:30 ` Lee Jones
2016-08-09 9:30 ` Lee Jones
2016-08-09 9:56 ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-08-09 9:56 ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-08-09 15:36 ` Lee Jones [this message]
2016-08-09 15:36 ` Lee Jones
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160809153615.GU5243@dell \
--to=lee.jones@linaro.org \
--cc=elfring@users.sourceforge.net \
--cc=julia.lawall@lip6.fr \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.