From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757406AbaJIPzG (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Oct 2014 11:55:06 -0400 Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk ([106.187.55.193]:42677 "EHLO mezzanine.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755682AbaJIPy6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Oct 2014 11:54:58 -0400 Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 16:54:40 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: Guenter Roeck Cc: Liam Girdwood , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, atull@opensource.altera.com Message-ID: <20141009155440.GV4609@sirena.org.uk> References: <1412806199-5363-1-git-send-email-broonie@kernel.org> <20141008223403.GA24828@roeck-us.net> <20141008223601.GP4609@sirena.org.uk> <20141008225912.GA25134@roeck-us.net> <20141008234541.GQ4609@sirena.org.uk> <20141009000555.GA27476@roeck-us.net> <20141009001213.GS4609@sirena.org.uk> <20141009002531.GA27920@roeck-us.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="hK5WMeVMNp/FmgOI" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20141009002531.GA27920@roeck-us.net> X-Cookie: Everything you know is wrong! User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 94.175.94.161 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: broonie@sirena.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: of: Lower the severity of the error with no container X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mezzanine.sirena.org.uk) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --hK5WMeVMNp/FmgOI Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 05:25:31PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 01:12:13AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > We'll do something, just a question of what and what the default is. > Ok. Note that a boot parameter would not work well for our use case, > so it would be great if we can find something else. Could you explain why please? > > Shove a dev_name() on the front if we get a collision? I have to say > > I've never cared, the debugfs isn't that important so it doesn't matter > > too much if it fails. > Sure, but, again, I am getting lots and lots of those error messages. > I probably would not care either (and probably not even have noticed) > if not for those messages. > Want me to submit a patch with the dev_name solution ? Yes, please. --hK5WMeVMNp/FmgOI Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUNq+/AAoJECTWi3JdVIfQKJUH/0QaJHCpq1t4e+UPRJEiA/91 Yu/42hjSFBGEFAiT7dED1vvqGfi3nlP9y+i6vGx06RoTDO689jjMuQz/sW2HYsTI Z0dqCTX928VBFOq9JxWCznnPksK6KZ+qzDyAbh3B06yYsBFDM+jxZZGHoV6k+cwA U80h9Ql6nvLIbE1Sajht2jGdGtzBW6ck9mr67UEloOSOl/GWh8qS/6Ly/RMO/Uqj y5ZoYPJAVWZd+qeXsKpznEmrF/D0F9M1CZL+LfrBqLEerUEXqcyGotHia++nDsPS ffsJH5EJdAlY/c+SzD+Sxu9OChDhVJuRAA0dUxHGOS/5w+vwtZFDRUFMFWhvJoE= =5vYd -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --hK5WMeVMNp/FmgOI--