On Monday 04 August 2008 06:02:27 pm James Bottomley wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 14:43 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Sunday 03 August 2008 12:02:12 pm James Bottomley wrote:
> > > +static void pci_note_irq_problem(struct pci_dev *pdev, const char *reason)
> > > +{
> > > + struct pci_dev *parent = to_pci_dev(pdev->dev.parent);
> > > +
> > > + dev_printk(KERN_ERR, &pdev->dev,
> > > + "Potentially misrouted IRQ (Bridge %s %04x:%04x)\n",
> > > + parent->dev.bus_id, parent->vendor, parent->device);
> >
> > Do you prefer "dev_printk(KERN_ERR, ...)" over "dev_err(...)"? Easier
> > to grep for the former, maybe? If so, should we deprecate "dev_err()"
> > and friends? When I converted most of the PCI core to use dev_printk(),
> > (80ccba1186d48f ...) I used dev_err(), but I don't really care one way
> > or the other.
> >
> > Maybe use pci_name(parent)?
> >
> > I tried to standardize the PCI core on "[%04x/%04x]" for vendor/device ID.
>
> To be honest I'm not really interested too much in the various API
> preferences ... they can be fixed up later by the people who care.
I'm happy to fix it up later if you prefer. I only mentioned it
because doing it later adds churn and risk of breakage.
Bjorn
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
