* [PATCH] fix RTC-CMOS message
@ 2009-04-02 16:52 Krzysztof Halasa
2009-04-02 16:57 ` [PATCH] fix RTC-CMOS message, now with SOB Krzysztof Halasa
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Krzysztof Halasa @ 2009-04-02 16:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Brownell; +Cc: lkml
With no IRQ available/defined, RTC-CMOS driver prints something like:
rtc0: alarms up to one no, y3k, 114 bytes nvram
^^^^
I guess the following is a bit easier to understand:
rtc0: no alarms, y3k, 114 bytes nvram
--- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-cmos.c
+++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-cmos.c
@@ -794,17 +794,15 @@ cmos_do_probe(struct device *dev, struct resource *ports, int rtc_irq)
goto cleanup2;
}
- pr_info("%s: alarms up to one %s%s, %zd bytes nvram%s\n",
- cmos_rtc.rtc->dev.bus_id,
- is_valid_irq(rtc_irq)
- ? (cmos_rtc.mon_alrm
- ? "year"
- : (cmos_rtc.day_alrm
- ? "month" : "day"))
- : "no",
- cmos_rtc.century ? ", y3k" : "",
- nvram.size,
- is_hpet_enabled() ? ", hpet irqs" : "");
+ pr_info("%s: %s%s, %zd bytes nvram%s\n",
+ cmos_rtc.rtc->dev.bus_id,
+ !is_valid_irq(rtc_irq) ? "no alarms" :
+ cmos_rtc.mon_alrm ? "alarms up to one year" :
+ cmos_rtc.day_alrm ? "alarms up to one month" :
+ "alarms up to one day",
+ cmos_rtc.century ? ", y3k" : "",
+ nvram.size,
+ is_hpet_enabled() ? ", hpet irqs" : "");
return 0;
--
Krzysztof Halasa
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] fix RTC-CMOS message, now with SOB
2009-04-02 16:52 [PATCH] fix RTC-CMOS message Krzysztof Halasa
@ 2009-04-02 16:57 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2009-04-04 18:02 ` David Brownell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Krzysztof Halasa @ 2009-04-02 16:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Brownell; +Cc: lkml
With no IRQ available/defined, RTC-CMOS driver prints something like:
rtc0: alarms up to one no, y3k, 114 bytes nvram
^^^^
I guess the following is a bit easier to understand:
rtc0: no alarms, y3k, 114 bytes nvram
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Hałasa <khc@pm.waw.pl>
--- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-cmos.c
+++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-cmos.c
@@ -794,17 +794,15 @@ cmos_do_probe(struct device *dev, struct resource *ports, int rtc_irq)
goto cleanup2;
}
- pr_info("%s: alarms up to one %s%s, %zd bytes nvram%s\n",
- cmos_rtc.rtc->dev.bus_id,
- is_valid_irq(rtc_irq)
- ? (cmos_rtc.mon_alrm
- ? "year"
- : (cmos_rtc.day_alrm
- ? "month" : "day"))
- : "no",
- cmos_rtc.century ? ", y3k" : "",
- nvram.size,
- is_hpet_enabled() ? ", hpet irqs" : "");
+ pr_info("%s: %s%s, %zd bytes nvram%s\n",
+ cmos_rtc.rtc->dev.bus_id,
+ !is_valid_irq(rtc_irq) ? "no alarms" :
+ cmos_rtc.mon_alrm ? "alarms up to one year" :
+ cmos_rtc.day_alrm ? "alarms up to one month" :
+ "alarms up to one day",
+ cmos_rtc.century ? ", y3k" : "",
+ nvram.size,
+ is_hpet_enabled() ? ", hpet irqs" : "");
return 0;
--
Krzysztof Halasa
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] fix RTC-CMOS message, now with SOB
2009-04-02 16:57 ` [PATCH] fix RTC-CMOS message, now with SOB Krzysztof Halasa
@ 2009-04-04 18:02 ` David Brownell
2009-04-04 19:32 ` Krzysztof Halasa
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: David Brownell @ 2009-04-04 18:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Krzysztof Halasa; +Cc: lkml
On Thursday 02 April 2009, Krzysztof Halasa wrote:
> + !is_valid_irq(rtc_irq) ? "no alarms" :
> + cmos_rtc.mon_alrm ? "alarms up to one year" :
> + cmos_rtc.day_alrm ? "alarms up to one month" :
> + "alarms up to one day",
Could you reformat that so it looks more like the compound-IF
statement it really is? That is, display the nesting structure.
And not use negative logic for that first test.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] fix RTC-CMOS message, now with SOB
2009-04-04 18:02 ` David Brownell
@ 2009-04-04 19:32 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2009-04-09 20:15 ` Andrew Morton
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Krzysztof Halasa @ 2009-04-04 19:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Brownell; +Cc: lkml
David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net> writes:
>> + !is_valid_irq(rtc_irq) ? "no alarms" :
>> + cmos_rtc.mon_alrm ? "alarms up to one year" :
>> + cmos_rtc.day_alrm ? "alarms up to one month" :
>> + "alarms up to one day",
>
> Could you reformat that so it looks more like the compound-IF
> statement it really is? That is, display the nesting structure.
You mean something like
>> + !is_valid_irq(rtc_irq) ? "no alarms" :
>> + cmos_rtc.mon_alrm ? "alarms up to one year" :
>> + cmos_rtc.day_alrm ? "alarms up to one month" :
>> + "alarms up to one day",
Not this certainly?
>> + !is_valid_irq(rtc_irq) ? "no alarms" :
>> + cmos_rtc.mon_alrm ? "alarms up to one year" :
>> + cmos_rtc.day_alrm ? "alarms up to one month" :
>> + "alarms up to one day",
> And not use negative logic for that first test.
I think it's worse WRT readability:
+ is_valid_irq(rtc_irq) ?
+ (cmos_rtc.mon_alrm ? "alarms up to one year" :
+ cmos_rtc.day_alrm ? "alarms up to one month" :
+ "alarms up to one day") :
+ "no alarms";
Feel free to use the following or your own version as long as the
resulting message is correct.
Thanks.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Hałasa <khc@pm.waw.pl>
--- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-cmos.c
+++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-cmos.c
@@ -794,17 +794,15 @@ cmos_do_probe(struct device *dev, struct resource *ports, int rtc_irq)
goto cleanup2;
}
- pr_info("%s: alarms up to one %s%s, %zd bytes nvram%s\n",
- cmos_rtc.rtc->dev.bus_id,
- is_valid_irq(rtc_irq)
- ? (cmos_rtc.mon_alrm
- ? "year"
- : (cmos_rtc.day_alrm
- ? "month" : "day"))
- : "no",
- cmos_rtc.century ? ", y3k" : "",
- nvram.size,
- is_hpet_enabled() ? ", hpet irqs" : "");
+ pr_info("%s: %s%s, %zd bytes nvram%s\n",
+ cmos_rtc.rtc->dev.bus_id,
+ !is_valid_irq(rtc_irq) ? "no alarms" :
+ cmos_rtc.mon_alrm ? "alarms up to one year" :
+ cmos_rtc.day_alrm ? "alarms up to one month" :
+ "alarms up to one day",
+ cmos_rtc.century ? ", y3k" : "",
+ nvram.size,
+ is_hpet_enabled() ? ", hpet irqs" : "");
return 0;
--
Krzysztof Halasa
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] fix RTC-CMOS message, now with SOB
2009-04-04 19:32 ` Krzysztof Halasa
@ 2009-04-09 20:15 ` Andrew Morton
2009-04-14 21:53 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2009-04-15 13:31 ` [PATCH] fix RTC-CMOS message, against 2.6.30-rc2 Krzysztof Halasa
0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Morton @ 2009-04-09 20:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Krzysztof Halasa; +Cc: david-b, linux-kernel
On Sat, 04 Apr 2009 21:32:27 +0200
Krzysztof Halasa <khc@pm.waw.pl> wrote:
> + (cmos_rtc.mon_alrm ? "alarms up to one year" :
> + cmos_rtc.day_alrm ? "alarms up to one month" :
> + "alarms up to one day") :
> + "no alarms";
>
> Feel free to use the following or your own version as long as the
> resulting message is correct.
> Thanks.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Ha__asa <khc@pm.waw.pl>
Please resend the full changelog (possibly with updates) with each
updated version of a patch.
> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-cmos.c
> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-cmos.c
> @@ -794,17 +794,15 @@ cmos_do_probe(struct device *dev, struct resource *ports, int rtc_irq)
> goto cleanup2;
> }
>
> - pr_info("%s: alarms up to one %s%s, %zd bytes nvram%s\n",
> - cmos_rtc.rtc->dev.bus_id,
> - is_valid_irq(rtc_irq)
> - ? (cmos_rtc.mon_alrm
> - ? "year"
> - : (cmos_rtc.day_alrm
> - ? "month" : "day"))
> - : "no",
> - cmos_rtc.century ? ", y3k" : "",
> - nvram.size,
> - is_hpet_enabled() ? ", hpet irqs" : "");
> + pr_info("%s: %s%s, %zd bytes nvram%s\n",
> + cmos_rtc.rtc->dev.bus_id,
> + !is_valid_irq(rtc_irq) ? "no alarms" :
> + cmos_rtc.mon_alrm ? "alarms up to one year" :
> + cmos_rtc.day_alrm ? "alarms up to one month" :
> + "alarms up to one day",
> + cmos_rtc.century ? ", y3k" : "",
> + nvram.size,
> + is_hpet_enabled() ? ", hpet irqs" : "");
>
> return 0;
The patch doesn't apply to current kernels (the driver core guys have
been running rampant again, methinks). Please redo, retest, resend?
Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] fix RTC-CMOS message, now with SOB
2009-04-09 20:15 ` Andrew Morton
@ 2009-04-14 21:53 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2009-04-15 13:31 ` [PATCH] fix RTC-CMOS message, against 2.6.30-rc2 Krzysztof Halasa
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Krzysztof Halasa @ 2009-04-14 21:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton; +Cc: david-b, linux-kernel
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> writes:
> The patch doesn't apply to current kernels (the driver core guys have
> been running rampant again, methinks). Please redo, retest, resend?
Sure, will do.
--
Krzysztof Halasa
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] fix RTC-CMOS message, against 2.6.30-rc2
2009-04-09 20:15 ` Andrew Morton
2009-04-14 21:53 ` Krzysztof Halasa
@ 2009-04-15 13:31 ` Krzysztof Halasa
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Krzysztof Halasa @ 2009-04-15 13:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton; +Cc: david-b, linux-kernel
With no IRQ available/defined, RTC-CMOS driver prints something like:
rtc0: alarms up to one no, y3k, 114 bytes nvram
^^^^
I guess the following is a bit easier to understand:
rtc0: no alarms, y3k, 114 bytes nvram
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Hałasa <khc@pm.waw.pl>
diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-cmos.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-cmos.c
index b6d35f5..23e10b6 100644
--- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-cmos.c
+++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-cmos.c
@@ -797,17 +797,15 @@ cmos_do_probe(struct device *dev, struct resource *ports, int rtc_irq)
goto cleanup2;
}
- pr_info("%s: alarms up to one %s%s, %zd bytes nvram%s\n",
- dev_name(&cmos_rtc.rtc->dev),
- is_valid_irq(rtc_irq)
- ? (cmos_rtc.mon_alrm
- ? "year"
- : (cmos_rtc.day_alrm
- ? "month" : "day"))
- : "no",
- cmos_rtc.century ? ", y3k" : "",
- nvram.size,
- is_hpet_enabled() ? ", hpet irqs" : "");
+ pr_info("%s: %s%s, %zd bytes nvram%s\n",
+ dev_name(&cmos_rtc.rtc->dev),
+ !is_valid_irq(rtc_irq) ? "no alarms" :
+ cmos_rtc.mon_alrm ? "alarms up to one year" :
+ cmos_rtc.day_alrm ? "alarms up to one month" :
+ "alarms up to one day",
+ cmos_rtc.century ? ", y3k" : "",
+ nvram.size,
+ is_hpet_enabled() ? ", hpet irqs" : "");
return 0;
--
Krzysztof Halasa
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-04-15 13:31 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-04-02 16:52 [PATCH] fix RTC-CMOS message Krzysztof Halasa
2009-04-02 16:57 ` [PATCH] fix RTC-CMOS message, now with SOB Krzysztof Halasa
2009-04-04 18:02 ` David Brownell
2009-04-04 19:32 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2009-04-09 20:15 ` Andrew Morton
2009-04-14 21:53 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2009-04-15 13:31 ` [PATCH] fix RTC-CMOS message, against 2.6.30-rc2 Krzysztof Halasa
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).