On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 11:19:02AM +0000, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Tue, 2004-12-07 at 11:42 +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > > Hi Ian, > > > > > - printk(KERN_ERR DRIVER ": bus is not idle. status is %#04x\n", state ); > > > + DEB1(KERN_ERR DRIVER ": bus is not idle. status is %#04x\n", state ); > > > > Doesn't look OK to me. Either this is an error and it has to be > > displayed regardless of DEBUG being enabled or not, or it is a debugging > > info and it should use KERN_DEBUG instead of KERN_ERR. In the latter > > case, I can already hear Greg suggest you should use pr_debug or even > > dev_dbg instead of printk. > > I think it can be considered a debug statement since I am reasonably > sure that it is a situation which cannot arise. I've only ever seen the > error with a pre-release of a slave part on the bus. The slave's i2c > implementation was fairly buggy, it ignored stop bits and hung the bus > if you sent it a duff command. The next rev of this particular slave > device shouldn't have this problem and I certainly wouldn't expect it in > released silicon. > > If it turns out that in practise (with production slave devices) we can > find that we hit this check then it would make sense to loop for a bit > until the bus becomes idle or we timeout. However I'd rather see it > happen with a production slave device before doing that. > > I've changed it to dev_dbg. > > Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <icampbell at arcom.com> Applied, thanks. greg k-h
