On Sun, 2012-04-29 at 12:11 -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Em 29-04-2012 11:25, Mauro Carvalho Chehab escreveu: > > Em 28-04-2012 05:52, Borislav Petkov escreveu: > >> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 01:07:38PM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > >>> Yes. This is a common issue at the EDAC core: on several places, it calls > >>> the > >>> edac debug macros (DEBUGF0...DEBUGF4) passing a __func__ as an argument, > >>> while > >>> the debug macros already handles that. I suspect that, in the past, the > >>> __func__ > >>> were not at the macros, but some patch added it there, and forgot to fix > >>> the > >>> occurrences of its call. > >> The patch that added it is d357cbb445208 and you reviewed it. > > And you wrote the patch that caused it.
And Boris should have also written the follow-on patches that removed most/all of the debugfX and __func__ uses. > > A single patch fixing this everywhere at drivers/edac is better and clearer > > than adding > > an unrelated fix on this patch. This is already complex enough to add more > > unrelated > > things there. > > > > Also, a simple perl/coccinelle script can replace all such __func__ > > occurrences > > on one shot. You make it sound simple, but it'd be a pretty complicated cocci script. Some of the changes would have to be inspected or changed by hand in any case. [] > Most of the issues can be solved with the above script-based patch. > > There are still 171 places (12 places at the core, the rest are on the > drivers) > that will require a more sophisticated patch or that requires a manual fix. [] > From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mche...@redhat.com> > Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 11:59:14 -0300 > Subject: [PATCH] edac: Don't add __func__ or __FILE__ for debugf[0-9] msgs Thanks Mauro, you shouldn't have had to do this. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
