On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 06:14:11AM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 04:58:48PM -0700, Chewie Lin wrote: > > Swap string in the dev_warn() call with __func__ argument, instead of > > explicitly calling the function name in the string: > > > > WARNING: Prefer using "%s", __func__ to embedded function names > > #417: FILE: main_usb.c:417: > > + "usb_device_reset fail status=%d\n", status); > > > > total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 1058 lines checked > > > > And after fix: > > > > main_usb.c has no obvious style problems and is ready for submission. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chewie Lin <linsh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c b/drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c > > index 9e074e9daf4e..71c4511b4cff 100644 > > --- a/drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c > > +++ b/drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c > > @@ -414,7 +414,7 @@ static void usb_device_reset(struct vnt_private *priv) > > status = usb_reset_device(priv->usb); > > if (status) > > dev_warn(&priv->usb->dev, > > - "usb_device_reset fail status=%d\n", status); > > + "%s fail status=%d\n", __func__, status); > > But the call that failed was called usb_device_reset(), right? Why is > this function even needed at all, have the caller call the correct > function instead please, and then this whole function can be deleted. > thanks greg. Yes, I think that's a good approach as well. I initially wanted to fix a coding style problem without touching the function calls, but I can definitely do that as well. linsh _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
