Hi Enrico,
On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 12:11:36PM +0100, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote:
> On 08.12.20 16:54, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> >> diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/atmel_usba_udc.c b/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/atmel_usba_udc.c
> >> index 2b893bceea45..4834fafb3f70 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/atmel_usba_udc.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/atmel_usba_udc.c
> >> @@ -1573,7 +1573,7 @@ static void usba_control_irq(struct usba_udc *udc, struct usba_ep *ep)
> >> * generate or receive a reply right away. */
> >> usba_ep_writel(ep, CLR_STA, USBA_RX_SETUP);
> >>
> >> - /* printk(KERN_DEBUG "setup: %d: %02x.%02x\n",
> >> + /* pr_debug("setup: %d: %02x.%02x\n",
> >> ep->state, crq.crq.bRequestType,
> >> crq.crq.bRequest); */
> >
> > I wonder if this shouldn't be dropped instead, commented-out code isn't
> > very useful.
>
> Indeed. Shall I send a separate patch for that ?
Yes, that would make sense.
> > When a pointer to a struct device is available, dev_err() would be much
> > better. That's however out of scope for this patch, but it would be nice
> > to address it. This would become
> >
> > dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Check IRQ setup!\n");
> >
>
> You're right. I didn't check for that yet. I'll do it in a separate
> patch.
As most of the files touched by this patch are device drivers, dev_*()
functions should be used instead of pr_*() where possible. I'd recommend
a first patch that converts to dev_*(), and then a second patch that
converts the remaining printk()s, if any, to pr_*() in the contexts
where no struct device is available or can easily be made available.
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
