From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] ACPI / PM: Make messages in acpi_device_set_power() print device names
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 14:11:04 +0200
Message-ID: <57324148.csaJoe9IZd@vostro.rjw.lan>
References: <10433383.dueoNg39qi@vostro.rjw.lan> <1895563.95T8SxMegu@vostro.rjw.lan> <CAOLK0pyBsD8vR0a2mcSucnD8zFTz8ZB72OPE0R9Z67SxH9VHRw@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Return-path: <linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAOLK0pyBsD8vR0a2mcSucnD8zFTz8ZB72OPE0R9Z67SxH9VHRw@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Lan Tianyu <lantianyu1986@gmail.com>
Cc: ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>, Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org

On Monday, July 29, 2013 11:06:36 AM Lan Tianyu wrote:
> 2013/7/27 Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>:
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> >
> > Modify acpi_device_set_power() so that diagnostic messages printed by
> > it to the kernel log always contain the name of the device concerned
> > to make it possible to identify the device that triggered the message
> > if need be.
> >
> > Also replace printk(KERN_WARNING ) with dev_warn() everywhere in that
> > function.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/acpi/device_pm.c |   22 ++++++++++------------
> >  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> >
> > Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
> > +++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
> > @@ -166,20 +166,20 @@ int acpi_device_set_power(struct acpi_de
> >         /* Make sure this is a valid target state */
> >
> >         if (state == device->power.state) {
> > -               ACPI_DEBUG_PRINT((ACPI_DB_INFO, "Device is already at %s\n",
> > +               ACPI_DEBUG_PRINT((ACPI_DB_INFO, "Device [%s] already in %s\n",
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^
> Missing "is" or it should be omitted?

The "is" is not necessary here (in my opinion).

Kind of in analogy with "This has been done already" and "Already done".

Thanks,
Rafael


-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.