From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [PATCH] libata: s/ap->id/ap->print_id/g Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 11:39:46 -0500 Message-ID: <45DB2452.9070603@garzik.org> References: <20070220160651.GS1625@htj.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:44844 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030218AbXBTQjs (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Feb 2007 11:39:48 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20070220160651.GS1625@htj.dyndns.org> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Tejun Heo Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Tejun Heo wrote: > ata_port has two different id fields - id and port_no. id is > system-wide 1-based unique id for the port while port_no is 0-based > host-wide port number. The former is primarily used to identify the > ATA port to the user in printk messages while the latter is used in > various places in libata core and LLDs to index the port inside the > host. > > The two fields feel quite similar and sometimes ap->id is used in > place of ap->port_no, which is very difficult to spot. This patch > renames ap->id to ap->print_id to reduce the possibility of such bugs. > > Some printk messages are adjusted such that id string (ata%u[.%u]) > isn't printed twice and/or to use ata_*_printk() instead of hardcoded > id format. > > Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo applied