Re: [PATCH 22/41] drivers: tty: serial: cpm_uart: fix logging calls

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 05:59:04PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> Le 27/04/2019 à 14:52, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult a écrit :
> > Fix checkpatch warnings by using pr_err():
> > 
> >      WARNING: Prefer [subsystem eg: netdev]_err([subsystem]dev, ... then dev_err(dev, ... then pr_err(...  to printk(KERN_ERR ...
> >      #109: FILE: drivers/tty/serial/cpm_uart/cpm_uart_cpm2.c:109:
> >      +		printk(KERN_ERR
> > 
> >      WARNING: Prefer [subsystem eg: netdev]_err([subsystem]dev, ... then dev_err(dev, ... then pr_err(...  to printk(KERN_ERR ...
> >      #128: FILE: drivers/tty/serial/cpm_uart/cpm_uart_cpm2.c:128:
> >      +		printk(KERN_ERR
> > 
> >      WARNING: Prefer [subsystem eg: netdev]_err([subsystem]dev, ... then dev_err(dev, ... then pr_err(...  to printk(KERN_ERR ...
> >      +           printk(KERN_ERR
> > 
> >      WARNING: Prefer [subsystem eg: netdev]_err([subsystem]dev, ... then dev_err(dev, ... then pr_err(...  to printk(KERN_ERR ...
> >      +           printk(KERN_ERR
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt <info@xxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@xxxxxx>
> 
> But is that really worth doing those changes ?
> 
> If we want to do something useful, wouldn't it make more sense to introduce
> the use of dev_err() in order to identify the faulting device in the message
> ?

+1 for switching to dev_*().

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko