On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 09:45:27AM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 02:17:14PM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote: > > If a parentless device was added during a PM transaction, developers > > might want to know which device caused the troube. Hence, output the > > kobject's name in this case. > > > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Mack <daniel@xxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> > > Cc: Len Brown <len.brown@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxx> > > Cc: Magnus Damm <damm@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > --- > > drivers/base/power/main.c | 2 +- > > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/base/power/main.c b/drivers/base/power/main.c > > index 941fcb8..9e9fe6a 100644 > > --- a/drivers/base/power/main.c > > +++ b/drivers/base/power/main.c > > @@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ void device_pm_add(struct device *dev) > > * transition is in progress in order to avoid leaving them > > * unhandled down the road > > */ > > - dev_WARN(dev, "Parentless device registered during a PM transaction\n"); > > + dev_WARN(dev, "Parentless device registered during a PM transaction: %s\n", kobject_name(&dev->kobj)); > > Doesn'tthe dev_WARN call already print the name of the device? Why > print it twice? Erm, no it didn't. Should it have? This is what I saw: [ 0.880646] Parentless device registered during a PM transaction Daniel _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
