From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] device: Add #define dev_fmt similar to #define pr_fmt
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2018 17:30:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180706153028.GA6838@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3f213f4f9ee604c1797af67360d8da1836b34271.1525878372.git.joe@perches.com>
On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 08:15:46AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> Add a prefixing macro to dev_<level> uses similar to the pr_fmt
> prefixing macro used in pr_<level> calls.
>
> This can help avoid some string duplication in dev_<level> uses.
>
> The default, like pr_fmt, is an empty #define dev_fmt(fmt) fmt
>
> Rename the existing dev_<level> functions to _dev_<level> and
> introduce #define dev_<level> _dev_<level> macros that use the
> new #define dev_fmt
>
> Miscellanea:
>
> o Consistently use #defines with fmt, ... and ##__VA_ARGS__
> o Remove unnecessary externs
SHouldn't these be separate patches please?
> Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
> ---
> drivers/base/core.c | 12 +++---
> include/linux/device.h | 103 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
> 2 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-)
Ok this seems like a lot of churn for no real apparent gain. What is
all of this getting us? What is the benifit, you have more code now,
why is that good?
confused,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-06 15:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-09 15:15 [PATCH 0/6] treewide: Add and use dev_fmt similar to pr_fmt Joe Perches
2018-05-09 15:15 ` [PATCH 1/6] x86/early-quirks: Rename duplicate define of dev_err Joe Perches
2018-05-13 13:03 ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-05-13 17:30 ` Joe Perches
2018-05-13 18:09 ` [tip:x86/cleanups] " tip-bot for Joe Perches
2018-05-09 15:15 ` [PATCH 2/6] device: Add #define dev_fmt similar to #define pr_fmt Joe Perches
2018-06-19 13:31 ` Joe Perches
2018-06-24 15:41 ` Joe Perches
2018-06-25 0:51 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-07-05 22:57 ` Joe Perches
2018-07-06 13:38 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-07-06 14:42 ` Joe Perches
2018-07-06 15:30 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman [this message]
2018-07-06 15:41 ` Joe Perches
2018-07-06 15:50 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-07-06 20:50 ` Corey Minyard
2018-07-07 8:35 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-05-09 15:15 ` [PATCH 3/6] ipmi: msghandler: Add and use pr_fmt and dev_fmt, remove PFX Joe Perches
2018-05-09 15:15 ` [PATCH 4/6] ipmi: Use more common logging styles Joe Perches
2018-05-09 15:15 ` [PATCH 5/6] ipmi: Convert printk(KERN_<level> to pr_<level>( Joe Perches
2018-05-09 15:15 ` [PATCH 6/6] infiniband: qplib_fp: Use dev_fmt Joe Perches
2018-05-15 14:40 ` Doug Ledford
2018-05-15 15:01 ` Selvin Xavier
2018-05-09 16:47 ` [PATCH 0/6] treewide: Add and use dev_fmt similar to pr_fmt Corey Minyard
2018-05-09 17:04 ` Joe Perches
2018-05-09 17:22 ` Corey Minyard
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180706153028.GA6838@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox