From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754849Ab3JXJyv (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Oct 2013 05:54:51 -0400 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:60220 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754441Ab3JXJyu (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Oct 2013 05:54:50 -0400 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 10:56:25 +0100 From: Greg KH To: Guenter Roeck Cc: Michal Marek , haver@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Frank Haverkamp , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de, cody@linux.vnet.ibm.com, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, utz.bacher@de.ibm.com, jsvogt@de.ibm.com, MIJUNG@de.ibm.com, cascardo@linux.vnet.ibm.com, michae@jasper.es Subject: Re: [PATCH] Generic WorkQueue Engine (GenWQE) device driver Message-ID: <20131024095625.GB12663@kroah.com> References: <1374740897-20304-1-git-send-email-haver@vnet.ibm.com> <1374740897-20304-2-git-send-email-haver@vnet.ibm.com> <51F12668.8000400@suse.cz> <1382534154.2791.8.camel@oc7383187364.ibm.com> <20131023134059.GB21936@sepie.suse.cz> <20131023152250.GA5224@kroah.com> <20131023181525.GB23728@roeck-us.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20131023181525.GB23728@roeck-us.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 11:15:25AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 04:22:50PM +0100, Greg KH wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 05:06:41PM +0200, Michal Marek wrote: > > > On 23.10.2013 16:14, Frank Haverkamp wrote: > > > > of course you are right. Let me try again. > > > > > > > > I hope this looks better now: > > > > + dev_info(&pci_dev->dev, "GenWQE driver version: %s %s%u\n", > > > > + DRV_VERS_STRING, GENWQE_DEVNAME, cd->card_idx); > > > > ... > > > > Also, _no_ driver should ever be doing this type of "hey, look at me, > > I'm now loaded!" type syslog spam anymore. It's pointless, and should > > be abolished where ever possible. That's one reason we have moved to > > the driver init type functions that make this impossible to do, and if > > possible, I recommend doing that here as well. > > > I agree. Do we have that as a general policy written down somewhere ? > That would help in reviews with authors insisting that they absolutely > want such messages. So, you want something written down that no one will ever read? :) Seriously, just push back, there's no reason we should ever take such crud. That's one reason those new macros are there, the side benefit of cleaning up code and removing lines was just a cover story... thanks, greg k-h