From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([134.134.136.65]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1Xe3jj-0004Bo-EU for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 15:10:08 +0000 Message-ID: <1413299343.7906.103.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] mtd: ubi: Extend UBI layer debug/messaging capabilities From: Artem Bityutskiy Reply-To: dedekind1@gmail.com To: Ezequiel Garcia Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 18:09:03 +0300 In-Reply-To: <20141014143902.GA9768@arch.hh.imgtec.org> References: <1413296037-22346-1-git-send-email-tlinder@codeaurora.org> <20141014143902.GA9768@arch.hh.imgtec.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Tanya Brokhman , Richard Weinberger , open list , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, Brian Norris , David Woodhouse List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 2014-10-14 at 11:39 -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > Please use some pr_fmt for this. Something like this before the headers > should be enough: > > #define pr_fmt(fmt) "UBI: block:" fmt Sinc ubiblock is a device, there should be a 'struct device' somewhere, so probably dev_printk() and other dev_*() printing functions would be a better choice? -- Artem