On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 22:23, Paul Walmsley <paul@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c
> index 8a18d1b..89000d3 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c
> @@ -339,8 +339,8 @@ int pwrdm_add_clkdm(struct powerdomain *pwrdm, struct
> clockdomain *clkdm)
> if (!pwrdm || !clkdm)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - pr_debug("powerdomain: associating clockdomain %s with powerdomain
> "
> - "%s\n", clkdm->name, pwrdm->name);
> + pr_debug("powerdomain: %s: associating clockdomain %s\n",
> + clkdm->name, pwrdm->name);
while at this, could i suggest having instead:
pr_debug("%s: %s: associating clockdomain %s\n", __func__,
clkdm->name, pwrdm->name);
since the function name helps associate the message back in, wont it
be a bit of a dual edged information as well?
or even simplify it further with
#define pr_fmt(fmt) "%s:%s: " fmt, "powerdomain", __func__
?
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
