On 06/30/2010 02:13 AM, David Howells wrote:
Justin P. Mattock<justinmattock@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
if (!ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
- int ret;
- ret = sysfs_create_link(&dev->kobj,&acpi_dev->dev.kobj,
+ fn = sysfs_create_link(&dev->kobj,&acpi_dev->dev.kobj,
"firmware_node");
- ret = sysfs_create_link(&acpi_dev->dev.kobj,&dev->kobj,
+ pn = sysfs_create_link(&acpi_dev->dev.kobj,&dev->kobj,
"physical_node");
+ if (fn) {
That new if-statement still needs indenting one more tab stop. It's indented
the same as the previous if-statement, but is actually in the body of that
previous if-statement.
The body of the second if-statement should be indented one tab beyond the if,
and else/else-if statements and the final closing brace should be indented
level with the if:
if (...) {
body;
} else if (...) {
body;
} else {
body;
}
so that they line up vertically.
Thanks for the info on this, I really appreciate it. I'll look at this
today, and resend.
+ dev_warn(dev, "dev:%p Failed to create firmware_node: %d\n",
+ acpi_dev, fn);
The "dev:%p " seems like it ought to be superfluous if you're using
dev_warn(), and certainly, returning the pointer isn't really useful, I
suspect.
I kept receiving an new warning for using acpi_dev the %p was the only
option I saw in the Documentation that worked
However, at this point you have two device struct pointers: dev and
&acip_dev->dev, so printing them both is may be good. Perhaps something like:
+ dev_warn(&acpi_dev->dev,
+ "Failed to create firmware_node link to %s %s: %d\n",
+ dev_driver_string(dev), dev_name(dev), fn);
David
o.k. I'll look at this today, and see if I can find/locate the device
name and string for these.
Justin P. Mattock
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
