Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 26 Jan 2022 00:58:12 +0000
From:   Phillip Potter <phil@philpotter.co.uk>
To:     Pavel Skripkin <paskripkin@gmail.com>
Cc:     dan.carpenter@oracle.com, Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net,
        straube.linux@gmail.com, martin@kaiser.cx,
        linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/10] staging: r8188eu: remove smaller sets of DBG_88E
 calls from os_dep dir
Message-ID: <YfCcpHJlER2tLQ1o@equinox>
References: <20220124224415.831-1-phil@philpotter.co.uk>
 <20220124224415.831-6-phil@philpotter.co.uk>
 <67ddc4d7-e19f-7c9d-a4b7-4eb555830ea1@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <67ddc4d7-e19f-7c9d-a4b7-4eb555830ea1@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 03:48:32PM +0300, Pavel Skripkin wrote:
> Hi Phillip,
> 
> On 1/25/22 01:44, Phillip Potter wrote:
> > Remove all DBG_88E calls from the os_dep directory, other than those in
> > os_dep/ioctl_linux.c, as this contains almost 200 on its own so will be
> > done in a separate patch for ease of review. These calls do not conform
> > to kernel coding standards and are superfluous. Also restructure where
> > appropriate to remove no longer needed code left behind by removal of
> > these calls. This will allow the eventual removal of the DBG_88E macro
> > itself.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Phillip Potter <phil@philpotter.co.uk>
> > ---
> 
> [code snip]
> 
> > -	/* 2012-07-11 Move here to prevent the 8723AS-VAU BT auto
> > -	 * suspend influence */
> > -	if (usb_autopm_get_interface(pusb_intf) < 0)
> > -			DBG_88E("can't get autopm:\n");
> > -
> 
> Didn't you make a function change here? I didn't test and also didn't find
> any mentions of tests in cover letter.
> 
> I am asking just to be sure you done it not by accident :)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With regards,
> Pavel Skripkin

Hi Pavel,

Thank you for this and your other feedback, really appreciate it :-) So
I mistakenly took this out, you're quite right - will fix in next
series.

Regards,
Phil