Am 03.11.2012 11:58, schrieb Julia Lawall:
> From: Julia Lawall <julia.law...@lip6.fr>
>
> Use WARN rather than printk followed by WARN_ON(1), for conciseness.
>
> A simplified version of the semantic patch that makes this transformation
> is as follows: (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
>
> // <smpl>
> @@
> expression list es;
> @@
>
> -printk(
> +WARN(1,
> es);
> -WARN_ON(1);
> // </smpl>
>
> Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <julia.law...@lip6.fr>
>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/ibm/emac/mal.c | 6 ++----
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/ibm/emac/mal.c
> b/drivers/net/ethernet/ibm/emac/mal.c
> index 479e43e..84c6b6c 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/ibm/emac/mal.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/ibm/emac/mal.c
> @@ -738,13 +738,11 @@ static int __devexit mal_remove(struct platform_device
> *ofdev)
> /* Synchronize with scheduled polling */
> napi_disable(&mal->napi);
>
> - if (!list_empty(&mal->list)) {
> + if (!list_empty(&mal->list))
> /* This is *very* bad */
> - printk(KERN_EMERG
> + WARN(1, KERN_EMERG
> "mal%d: commac list is not empty on remove!\n",
> mal->index);
> - WARN_ON(1);
> - }
>
> dev_set_drvdata(&ofdev->dev, NULL);
>
>
Hi Julia,
you are removing the {} behin the if. I prefer to be a bit conservative
about {}. There is suggest to keep them because WARN may be expanded in
future (with a second line) and that will cause subtle changes that do
no break the code. (Yes i know it is possible to write macros that
contain savely more than one line.)
re,
wh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
