From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/16] pcmcia: use dynamic debug infrastructure, deprecate CS_CHECK (misc drivers) From: Artem Bityutskiy To: Dominik Brodowski In-Reply-To: <20091026071352.GA26980@isilmar.linta.de> References: <20091024194219.GA19546@comet.dominikbrodowski.net> <1256413386-20501-14-git-send-email-linux@dominikbrodowski.net> <1256539331.29885.360.camel@localhost> <20091026071352.GA26980@isilmar.linta.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 09:26:31 +0200 Message-Id: <1256541991.29885.376.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: linux-pcmcia@lists.infradead.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org Reply-To: dedekind1@gmail.com List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, 2009-10-26 at 08:13 +0100, Dominik Brodowski wrote: > Hey, > > On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 08:42:11AM +0200, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > > On Sat, 2009-10-24 at 21:43 +0200, Dominik Brodowski wrote: > > > Convert PCMCIA drivers to use the dynamic debug infrastructure, instead of > > > requiring manual settings of PCMCIA_DEBUG. > > > > > > Also, remove all usages of the CS_CHECK macro and replace them with proper > > > Linux style calling and return value checking. The extra error reporting may > > > be dropped, as the PCMCIA core already complains about any (non-driver-author) > > > errors. > > > > > > CC: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org > > > CC: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org > > > Signed-off-by: Dominik Brodowski > > > > Have you been able to test the driver after the clean-up? > > No, I don't have all that much PCMCIA hardware -- and specifically none for > the drivers which were modified in this patch (parport, ixj-telephony, > sl811; pcmcia_mtd is marked broken anyway). This driver is old and ugly, and it is even possible that no one uses it anymore, so I guess getting clean-ups without testing is ok for it. However, in that case the clean-up patches should be reviewable, which I wouldn't say about your patch :-) Could you please split it on several smaller patches, each doing one thing only? -- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)