From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D312C4167B for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2023 16:20:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1378223AbjLAQUV (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Dec 2023 11:20:21 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33466 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229539AbjLAQUT (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Dec 2023 11:20:19 -0500 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.7]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B04B5C4 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2023 08:20:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1701447626; x=1732983626; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=ika2VtjZETtxM/AtAN25RiLrwnIQx+U2XpZBHMuTOUI=; b=Co4qHFcbyBEKz87F0cJSDbDi5pgQ0TFjLs0kvomItFKGKQhWA4cq5Sw+ EwkoppsdqeQFGe29PbMv7KCiNhmjPmy+Gfe850EMqoz2xFF97p7ULAqeN ieZP48pi9TC32ndQzxQtUFhkMXWOZeogXUIFsqZ/nn/e1L5kOWWFcu9lG sFZwbaTvD3EVikVx87VdCsTd0Xo25LQfDh5XYD2YPU6As6enmjvsjPOFh J5OC3NzwPD0YvJluauOv7XlWzIqgYzFMnF2iTiYasOn9tKlNql2MtyYoN s6CN95uOGupxoYZaoi36Plxx68SrSDe6ElOXcE574z+VucV/KvfitDFcf Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10911"; a="15062681" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.04,242,1695711600"; d="scan'208";a="15062681" Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by fmvoesa101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Dec 2023 08:20:25 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10911"; a="943131592" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.04,242,1695711600"; d="scan'208";a="943131592" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.54]) by orsmga005.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Dec 2023 08:20:23 -0800 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.97) (envelope-from ) id 1r96FY-000000012Hi-15zF; Fri, 01 Dec 2023 18:20:20 +0200 Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2023 18:20:19 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Guenter Roeck Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andy Whitcroft , Joe Perches , Dwaipayan Ray , Lukas Bulwahn Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] checkpatch: Add dev_err_probe() to the list of Log Functions Message-ID: References: <20231201151446.1593472-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> <3c709cc1-0da8-4d23-9f75-8c18d4d18779@roeck-us.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 06:17:51PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 08:01:28AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > On 12/1/23 07:14, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > dev_err_probe() is missing in the list of Log Functions and hence > > > checkpatch issues a warning in the cases when any other function > > > in use won't trigger it. Add dev_err_probe() to the list to behave > > > consistently. ... > > Not sure if I agree. The difference here is that dev_err_probe() > > has two additional parameters ahead of the string. I would very much prefer > > to have those two additional parameters on a separate line if the string is > > too long to fit in 100 columns with those two parameters on the same line. > > In other words, I very much prefer > > > > dev_err_probe(dev, -ESOMETHING, > > "very long string"); > > over > > dev_err_probe(dev, -ESOMETHING, "very long string"); > > > > and I don't really think that the latter has any benefits. > > > > Also note that other dev_xxx() log functions are not included in the above test > > and would still generate warnings. Accepting > > > > dev_err_probe(dev, -ESOMETHING, "very long string"); > > but not > > dev_err(dev, "very long string"); > > They are included, see the line previous to the added one. > (Regexp covers something like x_y_()* and x_*() families with the explicitly Should read: x_y_*() > listed * suffixes.) > > That's why _this_ change makes it consistent. > > > doesn't really make sense to me. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko