[PATCH 1/2] drm/rockchip: dsi: Perform trivial code cleanups

[Dragan Simic]

On 2024-11-08 15:09, Heiko Stübner wrote:
> Am Freitag, 8. November 2024, 15:05:02 CET schrieb Dragan Simic:
>> On 2024-11-08 14:56, Heiko Stübner wrote:
>> > Am Freitag, 8. November 2024, 14:53:57 CET schrieb Dragan Simic:
>> >> Perform a few trivial code cleanups, to make one logged message a bit
>> >> more
>> >> consistent with the other logged messages by capitalizing its first
>> >> word, and
>> >> to avoid line wrapping by using the 100-column width better.
>> >>
>> >> No intended functional changes are introduced by these code cleanups.
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Dragan Simic <dsimic at manjaro.org>
>> >> ---
>> >>  drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/dw-mipi-dsi-rockchip.c | 12 ++++--------
>> >>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>> >>
>> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/dw-mipi-dsi-rockchip.c
>> >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/dw-mipi-dsi-rockchip.c
>> >> index 58a44af0e9ad..f451e70efbdd 100644
>> >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/dw-mipi-dsi-rockchip.c
>> >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/dw-mipi-dsi-rockchip.c
>> >> @@ -1379,7 +1379,7 @@ static int dw_mipi_dsi_rockchip_probe(struct
>> >> platform_device *pdev)
>> >>  	}
>> >>
>> >>  	if (!dsi->cdata) {
>> >> -		DRM_DEV_ERROR(dev, "no dsi-config for %s node\n", np->name);
>> >> +		DRM_DEV_ERROR(dev, "No dsi-config for %s node\n", np->name);
>> >
>> > this is all probe-related, why not convert to dev_err_probe?
>> >
>> > As the doc states [0], DRM_DEV_ERROR is deprecated in favor of dev_err.
>> > So dev_err_probe would be the correct way to go?
>> 
>> Thanks for your quick response!  Seeing that DRM_DEV_ERROR() is now
>> deprecated (which I originally missed, in all honesty) makes me very
>> happy. :)  I've never been a huge fan of the format of the messages
>> that DRM_DEV_ERROR() produces.
>> 
>> However, perhaps it would be better to keep these patches as-is, as
>> some kind of an intermediate, limited-scope cleanup + bugfix combo,
>> and leave the complete DRM_DEV_ERROR() --> dev_err()/dev_err_probe()
>> conversion to separate patches.  I think it would be better to avoid
>> a partial conversion, and I'll be more than happy to put the complete
>> conversion on my TODO list. :)
> 
> But your patch-2 really just open-codes, what dev_err_probe is meant
> to fix. So with going this way, you're sort of making things worse 
> first,
> until that second step happens.
> 
> Similarly, reflowing lines for things that get removed in a week do not
> serve a purpose - those line-breaks have been that way for years
> already.

Hmm, it makes sense when described that way.  I'll see to perform the
complete conversion in the next few days.