On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 07:45:10AM -0500, Parmeshwr Prasad wrote:
> It is better if we add some printk from efifb messages.
> Please review the below patch.
First of all, we saw you patch.
Then,
> From 7fbac896ab87f1b37646ac2f49bb8216ec330642 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Parmeshwr Prasad <parmeshwr_prasad@xxxxxxxx>
> Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2015 06:50:32 -0500
> Subject: [PATCH] efi, x86: Add a debug option to the efi= cmdline
yours has the same Subject as mine. This is not how we do patches.
Consult Documentation/SubmittingPatches about how to do them properly.
What is more, your patch doesn't have a commit message. But it needs one.
Fix all that, send it as a *separate* patch after mine has been applied
and people will take a look then.
>
> Signed-off-by: Parmeshwr Prasad <parmeshwr_prasad@xxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c | 49 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
> 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c b/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c
> index 4bfff34..505bc56 100644
> --- a/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c
> +++ b/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c
> @@ -145,7 +145,8 @@ static int efifb_probe(struct platform_device *dev)
> printk(KERN_DEBUG "efifb: invalid framebuffer address\n");
> return -ENODEV;
> }
> - printk(KERN_INFO "efifb: probing for efifb\n");
> + if (efi_enabled(EFI_DBG))
> + printk(KERN_INFO "efifb: probing for efifb\n");
If we're going to use the "efifb" prefix, change those to pr_info and
define pr_fmt - lotsa examples in the kernel sources.
More importantly, you'd need a consensus from people that the printks in
efifb are really not interesting and should be behind efi=debug.
HTH.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
