This patches replaces one pr_debug call by dev_dbg and
changes the device used by one of the dev_err calls.
Signed-off-by: Aya Mahfouz <[email protected]>
---
drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c b/drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c
index 52f8e91..dca806a 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c
@@ -1447,7 +1447,7 @@ static int ir_probe(struct i2c_client *client, const struct i2c_device_id *id)
int ret;
bool tx_probe = false;
- pr_debug("%s: %s on i2c-%d (%s), client addr=0x%02x\n",
+ dev_dbg(&client->dev, "%s: %s on i2c-%d (%s), client addr=0x%02x\n",
__func__, id->name, adap->nr, adap->name, client->addr);
/*
@@ -1631,7 +1631,7 @@ out_put_xx:
out_put_ir:
put_ir_device(ir, true);
out_no_ir:
- dev_err(ir->l.dev, "%s: probing IR %s on %s (i2c-%d) failed with %d\n",
+ dev_err(&client->dev, "%s: probing IR %s on %s (i2c-%d) failed with %d\n",
__func__, tx_probe ? "Tx" : "Rx", adap->name, adap->nr,
ret);
mutex_unlock(&ir_devices_lock);
--
1.9.3
Em Tue, 4 Nov 2014 23:43:07 +0200
Aya Mahfouz <[email protected]> escreveu:
> This patches replaces one pr_debug call by dev_dbg and
> changes the device used by one of the dev_err calls.
Also doesn't apply. Probably made to apply on Greg's tree.
Regards,
Mauro
>
> Signed-off-by: Aya Mahfouz <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c b/drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c
> index 52f8e91..dca806a 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c
> @@ -1447,7 +1447,7 @@ static int ir_probe(struct i2c_client *client, const struct i2c_device_id *id)
> int ret;
> bool tx_probe = false;
>
> - pr_debug("%s: %s on i2c-%d (%s), client addr=0x%02x\n",
> + dev_dbg(&client->dev, "%s: %s on i2c-%d (%s), client addr=0x%02x\n",
> __func__, id->name, adap->nr, adap->name, client->addr);
>
> /*
> @@ -1631,7 +1631,7 @@ out_put_xx:
> out_put_ir:
> put_ir_device(ir, true);
> out_no_ir:
> - dev_err(ir->l.dev, "%s: probing IR %s on %s (i2c-%d) failed with %d\n",
> + dev_err(&client->dev, "%s: probing IR %s on %s (i2c-%d) failed with %d\n",
> __func__, tx_probe ? "Tx" : "Rx", adap->name, adap->nr,
> ret);
> mutex_unlock(&ir_devices_lock);
On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 11:43:07PM +0200, Aya Mahfouz wrote:
> This patches replaces one pr_debug call by dev_dbg and
> changes the device used by one of the dev_err calls.
i think you should mention in the commit message why you are changing the device.
and also for revised patch its better if you add version number in the subject.
like this is v2.
thanks
sudip
>
> Signed-off-by: Aya Mahfouz <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c b/drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c
> index 52f8e91..dca806a 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c
> @@ -1447,7 +1447,7 @@ static int ir_probe(struct i2c_client *client, const struct i2c_device_id *id)
> int ret;
> bool tx_probe = false;
>
> - pr_debug("%s: %s on i2c-%d (%s), client addr=0x%02x\n",
> + dev_dbg(&client->dev, "%s: %s on i2c-%d (%s), client addr=0x%02x\n",
> __func__, id->name, adap->nr, adap->name, client->addr);
>
> /*
> @@ -1631,7 +1631,7 @@ out_put_xx:
> out_put_ir:
> put_ir_device(ir, true);
> out_no_ir:
> - dev_err(ir->l.dev, "%s: probing IR %s on %s (i2c-%d) failed with %d\n",
> + dev_err(&client->dev, "%s: probing IR %s on %s (i2c-%d) failed with %d\n",
> __func__, tx_probe ? "Tx" : "Rx", adap->name, adap->nr,
> ret);
> mutex_unlock(&ir_devices_lock);
> --
> 1.9.3
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 08:17:11AM -0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Em Tue, 4 Nov 2014 23:43:07 +0200
> Aya Mahfouz <[email protected]> escreveu:
>
> > This patches replaces one pr_debug call by dev_dbg and
> > changes the device used by one of the dev_err calls.
>
> Also doesn't apply. Probably made to apply on Greg's tree.
>
> Regards,
> Mauro
>
Yes, I submit patches to Greg's tree. Should I clone your
tree?
Kind Regards,
Aya Saif El-yazal Mahfouz
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Aya Mahfouz <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c b/drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c
> > index 52f8e91..dca806a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c
> > @@ -1447,7 +1447,7 @@ static int ir_probe(struct i2c_client *client, const struct i2c_device_id *id)
> > int ret;
> > bool tx_probe = false;
> >
> > - pr_debug("%s: %s on i2c-%d (%s), client addr=0x%02x\n",
> > + dev_dbg(&client->dev, "%s: %s on i2c-%d (%s), client addr=0x%02x\n",
> > __func__, id->name, adap->nr, adap->name, client->addr);
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -1631,7 +1631,7 @@ out_put_xx:
> > out_put_ir:
> > put_ir_device(ir, true);
> > out_no_ir:
> > - dev_err(ir->l.dev, "%s: probing IR %s on %s (i2c-%d) failed with %d\n",
> > + dev_err(&client->dev, "%s: probing IR %s on %s (i2c-%d) failed with %d\n",
> > __func__, tx_probe ? "Tx" : "Rx", adap->name, adap->nr,
> > ret);
> > mutex_unlock(&ir_devices_lock);
On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 04:59:15PM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 11:43:07PM +0200, Aya Mahfouz wrote:
> > This patches replaces one pr_debug call by dev_dbg and
> > changes the device used by one of the dev_err calls.
>
> i think you should mention in the commit message why you are changing the device.
> and also for revised patch its better if you add version number in the subject.
> like this is v2.
>
> thanks
> sudip
>
Thanks Sudip for your feedback. I use versions if I keep the same subject.
Kind Regards,
Aya Saif El-yazal Mahfouz
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Aya Mahfouz <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c b/drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c
> > index 52f8e91..dca806a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/media/lirc/lirc_zilog.c
> > @@ -1447,7 +1447,7 @@ static int ir_probe(struct i2c_client *client, const struct i2c_device_id *id)
> > int ret;
> > bool tx_probe = false;
> >
> > - pr_debug("%s: %s on i2c-%d (%s), client addr=0x%02x\n",
> > + dev_dbg(&client->dev, "%s: %s on i2c-%d (%s), client addr=0x%02x\n",
> > __func__, id->name, adap->nr, adap->name, client->addr);
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -1631,7 +1631,7 @@ out_put_xx:
> > out_put_ir:
> > put_ir_device(ir, true);
> > out_no_ir:
> > - dev_err(ir->l.dev, "%s: probing IR %s on %s (i2c-%d) failed with %d\n",
> > + dev_err(&client->dev, "%s: probing IR %s on %s (i2c-%d) failed with %d\n",
> > __func__, tx_probe ? "Tx" : "Rx", adap->name, adap->nr,
> > ret);
> > mutex_unlock(&ir_devices_lock);
> > --
> > 1.9.3
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> > the body of a message to [email protected]
> > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 03:43:44PM +0200, Aya Mahfouz wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 08:17:11AM -0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > Em Tue, 4 Nov 2014 23:43:07 +0200
> > Aya Mahfouz <[email protected]> escreveu:
> >
> > > This patches replaces one pr_debug call by dev_dbg and
> > > changes the device used by one of the dev_err calls.
> >
> > Also doesn't apply. Probably made to apply on Greg's tree.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Mauro
> >
>
> Yes, I submit patches to Greg's tree. Should I clone your
> tree?
I'll take this one as it builds on a change in my tree.
thanks,
greg k-h