From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: wsa@the-dreams.de (Wolfram Sang) Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 21:15:20 +0900 Subject: [PATCH v6 5/6] i2c: at91: print hardware version In-Reply-To: <55782935.30608@cogentembedded.com> References: <5577428C.3090206@cogentembedded.com> <20150610080553.GO25800@odux.rfo.atmel.com> <55782935.30608@cogentembedded.com> Message-ID: <20150610121519.GB1592@katana> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org > >>>- dev_info(dev->dev, "AT91 i2c bus driver.\n"); > >>>+ dev_info(dev->dev, "AT91 i2c bus driver (version: %#x).\n", > > >> It looks as if you rather print the driver's version. :-) > > > From my point of view, having a version number for a Linux driver would > >be strange > > Not everybody shares your opinion. I tend to agree with Sergei but let's keep things simple: I'll make it "hw version" before applying. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: