On 12/13/2018 01:46 PM, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> Replace all DPRINTK calls with the ata_XXX_dbg functions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@xxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/ata/sata_nv.c | 22 ++++++++++------------
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/ata/sata_nv.c b/drivers/ata/sata_nv.c
> index 72c9b922a77b..aa2611d638ea 100644
> --- a/drivers/ata/sata_nv.c
> +++ b/drivers/ata/sata_nv.c
> @@ -1451,7 +1451,7 @@ static unsigned int nv_adma_qc_issue(struct ata_queued_cmd *qc)
>
> writew(qc->hw_tag, mmio + NV_ADMA_APPEND);
>
> - DPRINTK("Issued tag %u\n", qc->hw_tag);
> + ata_dev_dbg(qc->dev, "Issued tag %u\n", qc->hw_tag);
Don't we lose printing out __func__ this way?
>
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -2029,8 +2029,6 @@ static unsigned int nv_swncq_issue_atacmd(struct ata_port *ap,
> if (qc == NULL)
> return 0;
>
> - DPRINTK("Enter\n");
> -
You said "replace all", not "remove some". :-)
Though w/o __func__ this is pretty useless indeed...
[...]
> @@ -2053,7 +2051,7 @@ static unsigned int nv_swncq_qc_issue(struct ata_queued_cmd *qc)
> if (qc->tf.protocol != ATA_PROT_NCQ)
> return ata_bmdma_qc_issue(qc);
>
> - DPRINTK("Enter\n");
> + ata_dev_dbg(qc->dev, "Enter\n");
Same here, do we print out __func__ now? Else this is quite pointless.
>
> if (!pp->qc_active)
> nv_swncq_issue_atacmd(ap, qc);
[...]
> @@ -2136,10 +2134,10 @@ static int nv_swncq_sdbfis(struct ata_port *ap)
> */
> lack_dhfis = 1;
>
> - DPRINTK("id 0x%x QC: qc_active 0x%x,"
> + ata_port_dbg(ap, "QC: qc_active 0x%llx,"
Why silently change "%x" to "%llx"?
> "SWNCQ:qc_active 0x%X defer_bits %X "
> "dhfis 0x%X dmafis 0x%X last_issue_tag %x\n",
> - ap->print_id, ap->qc_active, pp->qc_active,
> + ap->qc_active, pp->qc_active,
> pp->defer_queue.defer_bits, pp->dhfis_bits,
> pp->dmafis_bits, pp->last_issue_tag);
>
[...]
MBR, Sergei
