On Thu, 2023-01-26 at 05:49 -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 03:02:20PM +1100, Frank Crawford wrote:
> > In cases where there are multiple chips, print out which chip is
> > referred to, in the informational message.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Frank Crawford <frank@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/hwmon/it87.c | 6 ++++--
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/it87.c b/drivers/hwmon/it87.c
> > index 16394b38dce3..5ca8449887da 100644
> > --- a/drivers/hwmon/it87.c
> > +++ b/drivers/hwmon/it87.c
> > @@ -2505,13 +2505,15 @@ static int __init it87_find(int sioaddr,
> > unsigned short *address,
> >
> > superio_select(sioaddr, PME);
> > if (!(superio_inb(sioaddr, IT87_ACT_REG) & 0x01)) {
> > - pr_info("Device not activated, skipping\n");
> > + pr_info("Device (DEVID=0x%x) not activated,
> > skipping\n",
> > + chip_type);
>
> At this point the textual name (it87_devices[sio_data->type].model)
> is already known. I would suggest to print that instead.
You are right. I'll update it to do so, although I also realised I
need to also print the sioaddr, so I can distinguish the case where
both chips are listed as the same. This is most common when force_id
has been used.
>
> Thanks,
> Guenter
>
> > goto exit;
> > }
> >
> > *address = superio_inw(sioaddr, IT87_BASE_REG) &
> > ~(IT87_EXTENT - 1);
> > if (*address == 0) {
> > - pr_info("Base address not set, skipping\n");
> > + pr_info("Base address not set (DEVID=0x%x),
> > skipping\n",
> > + chip_type);
> > goto exit;
> > }
> >
> > --
> > 2.39.1
> >
