On Mon, 2016-11-28 at 15:35 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Mon 2016-11-28 06:24:28, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Mon, 2016-11-28 at 12:50 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > On Thu 2016-11-24 14:27:13, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2016-11-24 at 22:44 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > > On Thu 2016-11-24 12:05:25, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, 2016-11-24 at 12:05 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > > > > Remove duplicate code from _tx routines.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > trivia:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
> > > > > > > b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
> > > > > >
> > > > > > []
> > > > > > > @@ -1960,6 +1960,38 @@ static void stmmac_tso_allocator(struct
> > > > > > > stmmac_priv *priv, unsigned int des,
> > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > }
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > +static void stmmac_xmit_common(struct sk_buff *skb, struct
> > > > > > > net_device *dev, int nfrags, struct dma_desc *desc)
> > > > > > > +{
> > > > > > > + struct stmmac_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > + if (unlikely(stmmac_tx_avail(priv) <= (MAX_SKB_FRAGS + 1))) {
> > > > > > > + if (netif_msg_hw(priv))
> > > > > > > + pr_debug("%s: stop transmitted packets\n",
> > > > > > > __func__);
> > > > > >
> > > > > > netif_dbg(priv, hw, dev, "%s: stop transmitted
> > > > > > packets\n",
> > > > > > __func__);
> > > > >
> > > > > Not now. Modifying the code while de-duplicating would be bad idea.
> > > >
> > > > Too many people think overly granular patches are the
> > > > best and only way to make changes.
> > > > Deduplication and consolidation can happen simultaneously.
> > >
> > > Can, but should not at this point. Please take a look at the driver in
> > > question before commenting on trivial printk style.
> >
> > I had.
> >
> > It's perfectly acceptable and already uses netif_<level> properly.
> >
> > This consolidation now introduces the _only_ instance where it is
> > now improperly using a netif_msg_<type> then single pr_<level>
> > function sequence that should be consolidated into netif_dbg.
> > Every other use of netif_msg_<level> then either emits multiple
> > lines or is used in an if/else.
>
> Are you looking at right driver?
Yes and I think you should make changes against -next
and not Linus' where this is:
b3e51069627e2 drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c (LABBE Corentin
2016-11-16 20:09:41 +0100 755)
netif_warn(priv, link, priv->dev,
b3e51069627e2 drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c (LABBE Corentin
2016-11-16 20:09:41 +0100 756)
"Speed (%d) not 10/100\n",
b3e51069627e2 drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c (LABBE Corentin
2016-11-16 20:09:41 +0100 757)
phydev->speed);
> I don't see single use of
> netif_msg_<level>, but see this at stmmac_main.c:756. Code is actually
> pretty consistent using pr_*.
>
> if (netif_msg_link(priv))
> pr_warn("%s: Speed (%d) not 10/100\n",
> dev->name, phydev->speed);
>
> Anyway, I'm moving code around, if you want to do trivial cleanups, do
> them yourself.
cheers, Joe
