On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 04:29:23PM +0530, Onkarnarth wrote: > From: Onkarnath <onkarnath.1@xxxxxxxxxxx> I think that the $subject should be similar to: https://patchwork.kernel.org/comment/25712288/ rather than the generic "refactoring error log". > > As %pe is already introduced, it's better to use it in place of (%ld) or (%d) for > printing error in logs. It will enhance readability of logs. > > Error print style is more consistent now. > > Co-developed-by: Maninder Singh <maninder1.s@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Maninder Singh <maninder1.s@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Onkarnath <onkarnath.1@xxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > Suggested by Bjorn Helgaas in below discussion > https://patchwork.kernel.org/comment/25712288/ Since you have indicated that Bjorn has suggested it, shouldn't there also be a "Suggested-by tag" in the commit message? > > drivers/pci/bus.c | 2 +- > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-dra7xx.c | 2 +- > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-meson.c | 16 +-- > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-armada8k.c | 4 +- > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-histb.c | 6 +- > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-intel-gw.c | 10 +- > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-keembay.c | 2 +- > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-kirin.c | 6 +- > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom-ep.c | 18 +-- > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c | 18 +-- > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-tegra194.c | 132 +++++++++--------- > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-uniphier-ep.c | 2 +- > drivers/pci/controller/pci-aardvark.c | 6 +- > drivers/pci/controller/pci-ftpci100.c | 2 +- > drivers/pci/controller/pci-tegra.c | 86 ++++++------ > drivers/pci/controller/pci-xgene.c | 4 +- > drivers/pci/controller/pcie-microchip-host.c | 2 +- > drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rcar-host.c | 14 +- > drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip.c | 34 ++--- > drivers/pci/controller/vmd.c | 2 +- > drivers/pci/doe.c | 4 +- > drivers/pci/endpoint/functions/pci-epf-mhi.c | 8 +- > drivers/pci/endpoint/functions/pci-epf-ntb.c | 2 +- > drivers/pci/endpoint/functions/pci-epf-test.c | 4 +- > drivers/pci/endpoint/functions/pci-epf-vntb.c | 2 +- > drivers/pci/endpoint/pci-ep-cfs.c | 12 +- > drivers/pci/endpoint/pci-epf-core.c | 16 +-- > drivers/pci/hotplug/acpiphp_core.c | 2 +- > drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp_core.c | 8 +- > drivers/pci/hotplug/shpchp_core.c | 4 +- > drivers/pci/of.c | 6 +- > drivers/pci/pci-driver.c | 4 +- > drivers/pci/pcie/dpc.c | 4 +- > drivers/pci/quirks.c | 2 +- > drivers/pci/setup-bus.c | 2 +- > drivers/pci/slot.c | 4 +- > drivers/pci/vgaarb.c | 2 +- > 37 files changed, 227 insertions(+), 227 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/bus.c b/drivers/pci/bus.c > index 826b5016a101..dbc16cf5a246 100644 > --- a/drivers/pci/bus.c > +++ b/drivers/pci/bus.c > @@ -351,7 +351,7 @@ void pci_bus_add_device(struct pci_dev *dev) > dev->match_driver = !dn || of_device_is_available(dn); > retval = device_attach(&dev->dev); > if (retval < 0 && retval != -EPROBE_DEFER) > - pci_warn(dev, "device attach failed (%d)\n", retval); > + pci_warn(dev, "device attach failed: %pe\n", ERR_PTR(retval)); Is there a reason behind dropping the parantheses? > > pci_dev_assign_added(dev, true); > } > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-dra7xx.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-dra7xx.c > index d2d17d37d3e0..79b6cc7f0287 100644 > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-dra7xx.c > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-dra7xx.c > @@ -801,7 +801,7 @@ static int dra7xx_pcie_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > reset = devm_gpiod_get_optional(dev, NULL, GPIOD_OUT_HIGH); > if (IS_ERR(reset)) { > ret = PTR_ERR(reset); > - dev_err(&pdev->dev, "gpio request failed, ret %d\n", ret); > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "gpio request failed: %pe\n", ERR_PTR(ret)); Similar question as above regarding converting "failed, ret" to "failed:". Is this a new convention that is expected to be followed, where all errors are supposed to have "failed: %pe", rather than custom statements? Please let me know if this has already been discussed elsewhere. [...] Regards, Siddharth.
