From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933643AbbFJMKn (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Jun 2015 08:10:43 -0400 Received: from mail-la0-f51.google.com ([209.85.215.51]:34920 "EHLO mail-la0-f51.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933054AbbFJMKc (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Jun 2015 08:10:32 -0400 Message-ID: <55782935.30608@cogentembedded.com> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 15:10:29 +0300 From: Sergei Shtylyov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Cyrille Pitchen , nicolas.ferre@atmel.com, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, wsa@the-dreams.de, mark.rutland@arm.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, pawel.moll@arm.com, ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, galak@codeaurora.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 5/6] i2c: at91: print hardware version References: <5577428C.3090206@cogentembedded.com> <20150610080553.GO25800@odux.rfo.atmel.com> In-Reply-To: <20150610080553.GO25800@odux.rfo.atmel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello. On 6/10/2015 11:05 AM, Ludovic Desroches wrote: >>> The probe() function now prints the hardware version of the I2C >>> controller. >>> Signed-off-by: Cyrille Pitchen >>> --- >>> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c | 5 ++++- >>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c >>> index 817ae69..6e88b30 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c >>> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c >> [...] >>> @@ -908,7 +910,8 @@ static int at91_twi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >>> return rc; >>> } >>> >>> - dev_info(dev->dev, "AT91 i2c bus driver.\n"); >>> + dev_info(dev->dev, "AT91 i2c bus driver (version: %#x).\n", >> It looks as if you rather print the driver's version. :-) > From my point of view, having a version number for a Linux driver would > be strange Not everybody shares your opinion. > so it's not confusing. Oh, it is, from the purely grammatical PoV. Addiung "hardware " to "version" (or not mentioning the driver at all) would clear up that confusion. >> >>> + at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_VER)); >>> return 0; >>> } >> WBR, Sergei > Regards > Ludovic WBR, Sergei