From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To: Sebastian Capella <sebastian.capella@linaro.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
        linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, patches@linaro.org,
        Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>, Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/3] trivial: PM / Hibernate: clean up checkpatch in hibernate.c
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 12:07:33 +0100
Message-ID: <4268996.47Qr0HBDfp@vostro.rjw.lan>
User-Agent: KMail/4.11.4 (Linux/3.13.0+; KDE/4.11.4; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <20140205002413.7648.33035@capellas-linux>
References: <1391546631-7715-1-git-send-email-sebastian.capella@linaro.org> <2342041.V7doIJk0XQ@vostro.rjw.lan> <20140205002413.7648.33035@capellas-linux>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Tuesday, February 04, 2014 04:24:13 PM Sebastian Capella wrote:
> Quoting Rafael J. Wysocki (2014-02-04 16:28:13)
> > On Tuesday, February 04, 2014 04:06:42 PM Sebastian Capella wrote:
> > > Quoting Rafael J. Wysocki (2014-02-04 16:03:29)
> > > > On Tuesday, February 04, 2014 03:22:22 PM Sebastian Capella wrote:
> > > > > Quoting Sebastian Capella (2014-02-04 14:37:33)
> > > > > > Quoting Rafael J. Wysocki (2014-02-04 13:36:29)
> > > > > > > >  static int __init resumedelay_setup(char *str)
> > > > > > > >  {
> > > > > > > > -     resume_delay = simple_strtoul(str, NULL, 0);
> > > > > > > > +     int ret = kstrtoint(str, 0, &resume_delay);
> > > > > > > > +     /* mask must_check warn; on failure, leaves resume_delay unchanged */
> > > > > > > > +     (void)ret;
> > > > > 
> > > > > One unintended consequence of this change is that it'll now accept a
> > > > > negative integer parameter.
> > > > 
> > > > Well, what about using kstrtouint(), then?
> > > I was thinking of doing something like:
> > > 
> > >       int delay, res;
> > >       res = kstrtoint(str, 0, &delay);
> > >       if (!res && delay >= 0)
> > >               resume_delay = delay;
> > >       return 1;
> > 
> > It uses simple_strtoul() for a reason.  You can change the type of resume_delay
> > to match, but the basic question is:
> > 
> > Why exactly do you want to change that thing?
> 
> This entire patch is a result of a single checkpatch warning from a printk
> that I indented.
> 
> I was hoping to be helpful by removing all of the warnings from this
> file, since I was going to have a separate cleanup patch for the printk.
> 
> I can see this is not a good direction.
> 
> Would it be better also to leave the file's printks as they were and drop
> the cleanup patch completely?

Well, I had considered changing them to pr_something, but decided that it
wasn't worth the effort.  Quite frankly, I'd leave the code as is. :-)

Thanks!

-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/