Hi, Geert,
On 11.10.2023 10:43, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Claudiu,
>
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 9:37 AM claudiu beznea <claudiu.beznea@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 10.10.2023 17:52, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
>>> On 10/10/23 4:26 PM, Claudiu wrote:
>>>> From: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea.uj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>
>>>> Use %x format specifier to print CLK_ON_R(). This is easier when
>>>> debugging as the value printed will be hexadecimal like in the hardware
>>>> manual. Along with it "0x" has been added in front of the printed value.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea.uj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/clk/renesas/rzg2l-cpg.c | 2 +-
>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/renesas/rzg2l-cpg.c b/drivers/clk/renesas/rzg2l-cpg.c
>>>> index d62f1bc1f60e..764bd72cf059 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/clk/renesas/rzg2l-cpg.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/clk/renesas/rzg2l-cpg.c
>>>> @@ -1213,7 +1213,7 @@ static int rzg2l_mod_clock_endisable(struct clk_hw *hw, bool enable)
>>>> return 0;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> - dev_dbg(dev, "CLK_ON %u/%pC %s\n", CLK_ON_R(reg), hw->clk,
>>>> + dev_dbg(dev, "CLK_ON 0x%x/%pC %s\n", CLK_ON_R(reg), hw->clk,
>>>
>>> Perhaps "%#x" instead of "0x%x"?
>>
>> Yes, better, thanks!
>
> "%#" is not very common in drivers/clk/.
>
> And to me it always raises the question: What does "alternate form" mean
> for this conversion specifier and this implementation of vsnprintf()?
OK, I have no strong opinion on this. Please let me know in case you need
me to send a new version.
Thank you,
Claudiu Beznea
>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
> Geert
>
