[PATCH 0/1] drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c: checkpatch warning

[PATCH 0/1] drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c: checkpatch warning

[Chewie Lin]

Hi All,

I'm submitting this patch as part of Eudyptula challenge to fix a
coding style problem.  Thanks for taking time on this trivial patch.

linsh

Chewie Lin (1):
  drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c: checkpatch warning

 drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

-- 
2.12.2

[PATCH 1/1] drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c: checkpatch warning

[Chewie Lin]

Swap string in the dev_warn() call with __func__ argument, instead of
explicitly calling the function name in the string:

        WARNING: Prefer using "%s", __func__ to embedded function names
        #417: FILE: main_usb.c:417:
        +                        "usb_device_reset fail status=%d\n", status);

        total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 1058 lines checked

And after fix:

        main_usb.c has no obvious style problems and is ready for submission.

Signed-off-by: Chewie Lin <linsh@oregonstate.edu>
---
 drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c b/drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c
index 9e074e9daf4e..71c4511b4cff 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c
@@ -414,7 +414,7 @@ static void usb_device_reset(struct vnt_private *priv)
 	status = usb_reset_device(priv->usb);
 	if (status)
 		dev_warn(&priv->usb->dev,
-			 "usb_device_reset fail status=%d\n", status);
+			 "%s fail status=%d\n", __func__, status);
 }
 
 static void vnt_free_int_bufs(struct vnt_private *priv)
-- 
2.12.2

Re: [PATCH 1/1] drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c: checkpatch warning

[Greg KH]

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 04:58:48PM -0700, Chewie Lin wrote:
> Swap string in the dev_warn() call with __func__ argument, instead of
> explicitly calling the function name in the string:
> 
>         WARNING: Prefer using "%s", __func__ to embedded function names
>         #417: FILE: main_usb.c:417:
>         +                        "usb_device_reset fail status=%d\n", status);
> 
>         total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 1058 lines checked
> 
> And after fix:
> 
>         main_usb.c has no obvious style problems and is ready for submission.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chewie Lin <linsh@oregonstate.edu>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c b/drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c
> index 9e074e9daf4e..71c4511b4cff 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c
> @@ -414,7 +414,7 @@ static void usb_device_reset(struct vnt_private *priv)
>  	status = usb_reset_device(priv->usb);
>  	if (status)
>  		dev_warn(&priv->usb->dev,
> -			 "usb_device_reset fail status=%d\n", status);
> +			 "%s fail status=%d\n", __func__, status);

But the call that failed was called usb_device_reset(), right?  Why is
this function even needed at all, have the caller call the correct
function instead please, and then this whole function can be deleted.

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: [PATCH 1/1] drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c: checkpatch warning

[Chewie Lin]

On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 06:14:11AM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 04:58:48PM -0700, Chewie Lin wrote:
> > Swap string in the dev_warn() call with __func__ argument, instead of
> > explicitly calling the function name in the string:
> > 
> >         WARNING: Prefer using "%s", __func__ to embedded function names
> >         #417: FILE: main_usb.c:417:
> >         +                        "usb_device_reset fail status=%d\n", status);
> > 
> >         total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 1058 lines checked
> > 
> > And after fix:
> > 
> >         main_usb.c has no obvious style problems and is ready for submission.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Chewie Lin <linsh@oregonstate.edu>
> > ---
> >  drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c b/drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c
> > index 9e074e9daf4e..71c4511b4cff 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/vt6656/main_usb.c
> > @@ -414,7 +414,7 @@ static void usb_device_reset(struct vnt_private *priv)
> >  	status = usb_reset_device(priv->usb);
> >  	if (status)
> >  		dev_warn(&priv->usb->dev,
> > -			 "usb_device_reset fail status=%d\n", status);
> > +			 "%s fail status=%d\n", __func__, status);
> 
> But the call that failed was called usb_device_reset(), right?  Why is
> this function even needed at all, have the caller call the correct
> function instead please, and then this whole function can be deleted.
> 

thanks greg. 
Yes, I think that's a good approach as well. I initially wanted to fix a 
coding style problem without touching the function calls, but I can 
definitely do that as well. 

linsh