On Tue, 2020-01-14 at 11:24 +1000, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
> Hi Filipe,
>
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 5:23 AM Filipe Laíns <lains@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > When exporting all other types of report descriptors we print a debug
> > message. Not doing so for HID++ descriptors makes unaware users think
> > that no HID++ descriptor was exported.
>
> Unless I am mistaken, those dbg_hid() calls are not displayed by
> default on any distribution. So I am not sure what is the benefit to
> add this one here when we are already not showing the rest to the
> users by default. There is a tiny improvement to have some code
> symmetry, but here, honestly, it doesn't feel that required.
>
> Cheers,
> Benjamin
Hi Benjamin,
As far as I know, they aren't. This was just a nitpick. As I already
had the code locally I decided to just go ahead and submit the patch.
But noted, I won't submit any more of this nitpick patches.
> > Signed-off-by: Filipe Laíns <lains@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/hid/hid-logitech-dj.c | 2 ++
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-logitech-dj.c b/drivers/hid/hid-logitech-dj.c
> > index cc7fc71d8b05..8f17a29b5a94 100644
> > --- a/drivers/hid/hid-logitech-dj.c
> > +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-logitech-dj.c
> > @@ -1368,6 +1368,8 @@ static int logi_dj_ll_parse(struct hid_device *hid)
> > }
> >
> > if (djdev->reports_supported & HIDPP) {
> > + dbg_hid("%s: sending a HID++ descriptor, reports_supported: %llx\n",
> > + __func__, djdev->reports_supported);
> > rdcat(rdesc, &rsize, hidpp_descriptor,
> > sizeof(hidpp_descriptor));
> > }
> > --
> > 2.24.1
> >
Thank you,
Filipe Laíns
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
