On 11/09/12 16:39, Jingoo Han wrote: > On Tuesday, September 11, 2012 3:31 PM Felipe Balbi wrote > >> >> Hi, >> >> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 08:59:11PM +0900, Jingoo Han wrote: >>> This patch uses pr_* instead of printk. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jingoo Han <[email protected]> >>> --- >>> drivers/gpio/gpio-samsung.c | 6 +++--- >>> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-samsung.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-samsung.c >>> index ba126cc..e38d990 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-samsung.c >>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-samsung.c >>> @@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ >>> #ifndef DEBUG_GPIO >>> #define gpio_dbg(x...) do { } while (0) >>> #else >>> -#define gpio_dbg(x...) printk(KERN_DEBUG x) >>> +#define gpio_dbg(x...) pr_debug(x) >>> #endif >>> >>> int samsung_gpio_setpull_updown(struct samsung_gpio_chip *chip, >>> @@ -926,10 +926,10 @@ static void __init samsung_gpiolib_add(struct >>> samsung_gpio_chip *chip) >>> #ifdef CONFIG_PM >>> if (chip->pm != NULL) { >>> if (!chip->pm->save || !chip->pm->resume) >>> - printk(KERN_ERR "gpio: %s has missing PM functions\n", >>> + pr_err("gpio: %s has missing PM functions\n", >>> gc->label); >> >> I would rather see dev_* conversion instead. >> >> my 2 cents > > Hi Felipe Balbi, > > OK, I will replace printk(KERN_ERR...) with dev_err. > Thank you.
I was going to suggest that also, but I don't think that there is a dev pointer to use. The gpio_chip structure has an optional one, but from my quick glance it didn't look like the Samsung driver was using it. I could be wrong though. If I am, go with dev_err (and dev_dbg for replacing the gpio_dbg statements). ~Ryan -- 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/
