On Tue, May 9, 2017, at 14:33, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-05-09 at 14:10 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > > While here, print negative error without changing a sign as it is a
> > > common pattern in the kernel.
> >
> > A separate patch for this would be better: it would be easier to
> > actually check that no functional changes crept in by mistake.
>
> It doesn't make sense to me. It would touch same lines of code I do
> already here and it's only one place, see below.
I had to go line-by-line looking for the darn thing, instead of just
compiling before-and-after and checking for an unchanged object file.
> > > rc = fan_set_enable();
> > > if (rc < 0) {
> > > - pr_err("fan watchdog: error %d while enabling fan,
> > > "
> > > - "will try again later...\n", -rc);
> > > + pr_err("fan watchdog: error %d while enabling fan,
> > > will try again later...\n",
> > > + rc);
Yeah. This one. I don't have a problem with this change at all (I acked
it), but it took some effort to find the nail in the hailstack.
--
Henrique Holschuh
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
ibm-acpi-devel mailing list
ibm-acpi-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ibm-acpi-devel
