On 2024-11-08 15:30, Dragan Simic wrote:
On 2024-11-08 15:22, Heiko Stübner wrote:
Am Freitag, 8. November 2024, 15:13:33 CET schrieb Dragan Simic:
On 2024-11-08 15:09, Heiko Stübner wrote:
> Am Freitag, 8. November 2024, 15:05:02 CET schrieb Dragan Simic:
>> On 2024-11-08 14:56, Heiko Stübner wrote:
>> > Am Freitag, 8. November 2024, 14:53:57 CET schrieb Dragan Simic:
>> >> Perform a few trivial code cleanups, to make one logged message a bit
>> >> more
>> >> consistent with the other logged messages by capitalizing its first
>> >> word, and
>> >> to avoid line wrapping by using the 100-column width better.
>> >>
>> >> No intended functional changes are introduced by these code cleanups.
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Dragan Simic <dsimic@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >> ---
>> >> drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/dw-mipi-dsi-rockchip.c | 12 ++++--------
>> >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>> >>
>> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/dw-mipi-dsi-rockchip.c
>> >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/dw-mipi-dsi-rockchip.c
>> >> index 58a44af0e9ad..f451e70efbdd 100644
>> >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/dw-mipi-dsi-rockchip.c
>> >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/dw-mipi-dsi-rockchip.c
>> >> @@ -1379,7 +1379,7 @@ static int dw_mipi_dsi_rockchip_probe(struct
>> >> platform_device *pdev)
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >> if (!dsi->cdata) {
>> >> - DRM_DEV_ERROR(dev, "no dsi-config for %s node\n", np->name);
>> >> + DRM_DEV_ERROR(dev, "No dsi-config for %s node\n", np->name);
>> >
>> > this is all probe-related, why not convert to dev_err_probe?
>> >
>> > As the doc states [0], DRM_DEV_ERROR is deprecated in favor of dev_err.
>> > So dev_err_probe would be the correct way to go?
>>
>> Thanks for your quick response! Seeing that DRM_DEV_ERROR() is now
>> deprecated (which I originally missed, in all honesty) makes me very
>> happy. :) I've never been a huge fan of the format of the messages
>> that DRM_DEV_ERROR() produces.
>>
>> However, perhaps it would be better to keep these patches as-is, as
>> some kind of an intermediate, limited-scope cleanup + bugfix combo,
>> and leave the complete DRM_DEV_ERROR() --> dev_err()/dev_err_probe()
>> conversion to separate patches. I think it would be better to avoid
>> a partial conversion, and I'll be more than happy to put the complete
>> conversion on my TODO list. :)
>
> But your patch-2 really just open-codes, what dev_err_probe is meant
> to fix. So with going this way, you're sort of making things worse
> first,
> until that second step happens.
>
> Similarly, reflowing lines for things that get removed in a week do not
> serve a purpose - those line-breaks have been that way for years
> already.
Hmm, it makes sense when described that way. I'll see to perform the
complete conversion in the next few days.
just a note, as written on IRC earlier, I am sitting on a
dev_err_probe
conversion for dw-dsi-rockchip.
I was waiting to see if more cleanups turned up, so didn't sent that
yet.
Don't want to steal your spotlight though, so not sure if I should
send
that or wait for your conversion ;-)
I see no reasons why should we duplicate some effort. :) If you're
already nearing the file-level conversion to its completion, please
feel free to send it, and we can drop this series. :)
Sorry, I wasn't clear enough. When I wrote "we can drop this series",
I actually referred to what this series might have turned into, i.e.
into my file-level conversion. :)
