On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 08:25:07PM +0100, Belisko Marek wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Dan Carpenter <error27@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 09:21:16AM +0100, Marek Belisko wrote:
> >> - if (urb->status)
> >> - printk("%s: TX status %d\n", ft1000dev->net->name, urb->status);
> >> + if (urb->status)
> >> + DEBUG("%s: TX status %d\n", ft1000dev->net->name, urb->status);
> >>
> >
> > Why did you change the printk() to a DEBUG()? That's a behavior change,
> > and it should have been mentioned in the commit message.
> Mea culpa. checkpatch.pl complain about no KERN_... prefix so just fix with
> replace to DEBUG. Will return back to printk.
> @Greg: should resend whole serie or just this patch?
pr_err() or pr_info() would probably be better.
Here is how the usb-skeleton driver handles this btw:
/* sync/async unlink faults aren't errors */
if (urb->status) {
if (!(urb->status == -ENOENT ||
urb->status == -ECONNRESET ||
urb->status == -ESHUTDOWN))
err("%s - nonzero write bulk status received: %d",
__func__, urb->status);
dev->errors = urb->status;
} else {
dev->bulk_in_filled = urb->actual_length;
}
That uses the old usb err() macro which I think is not recomended these
days. Use pr_err() instead.
Do the other patches still apply if you resend just this patch? Btw
git send-email has a --in-reply-to option so that the V2 is attached to
the same thread as the original patch.
regards,
dan carpenter
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
