From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Liam Girdwood Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] ASoC: dapm: Standardise ASoC DAPM messages Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 11:43:04 +0000 Message-ID: <50AB6CC8.6080704@ti.com> References: <1353335955-5249-1-git-send-email-lrg@ti.com> <20121120003108.GB4483@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from bear.ext.ti.com (bear.ext.ti.com [192.94.94.41]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85E9B265343 for ; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 12:43:10 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <20121120003108.GB4483@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: Mark Brown Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On 20/11/12 00:31, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 02:39:12PM +0000, Liam Girdwood wrote: >> Currently ASoC has a mixture of message prefixes e.g. "ASoC", "asoc" >> or none and message types e.g. pr_debug or dev_dbg. >> >> Make sure all ASoC core messages use the same "ASoC" prefix and >> convert any component device specific messages to use dev_dbg >> instead of pr_debug. > > So, the reason we used to have the prefixes was that we didn't have dev_ > versions of the macros - I'd been going the other way and stripping out > the prefixes for ASoC: because they seemed noisy and out of line with > most other subsystems which either use dev_ or put a prefix in but not > both. > Ok, my thinking here was that it was quite useful when debugging the new FW code. e.g. I knew if it was a core or driver related issue. However, I'm easy on it going completely and I'll redo in favour of removing the pr_ and printk for device specific errors. LLiam