edac: Don't add __func__ or __FILE__ for debugf[0-9] msgs

The debug macro already adds that. Most of the work here was
made by this small script:

$f .=$_ while (<>);

$f =~ s/(debugf[0-9]\s*\(\s*)__FILE__\s*": /\1"/g;
$f =~ s/(debugf[0-9]\s*\(\s*)__FILE__\s*/\1/g;
$f =~ s/(debugf[0-9]\s*\(\s*)__FILE__\s*"MC: /\1"/g;

$f =~ s/(debugf[0-9]\s*\(\")\%s[\:\,\(\)]*\s*([^\"]*\s*[^\)]+)__func__\s*\,\s*/\1\2/g;
$f =~ s/(debugf[0-9]\s*\(\")\%s[\:\,\(\)]*\s*([^\"]*\s*[^\)]+),\s*__func__\s*\)/\1\2)/g;
$f =~ s/(debugf[0-9]\s*\(\"MC\:\s*)\%s[\:\,\(\)]*\s*([^\"]*\s*[^\)]+)__func__\s*\,\s*/\1\2/g;
$f =~ s/(debugf[0-9]\s*\(\"MC\:\s*)\%s[\:\,\(\)]*\s*([^\"]*\s*[^\)]+),\s*__func__\s*\)/\1\2)/g;

$f =~ s/\"MC\: \\n\"/"MC:\\n"/g;

print $f;

After running the script, manual cleanups were done to fix it the remaining
places.

While here, removed the __LINE__ on most places, as it doesn't actually give
useful info on most places.

Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@redhat.com>
This commit is contained in:
Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2012-04-29 11:59:14 -03:00
والد 2639c3ee29
کامیت dd23cd6eb1
26فایلهای تغییر یافته به همراه331 افزوده شده و 357 حذف شده

مشاهده پرونده

@@ -1064,7 +1064,7 @@ static void sbridge_put_devices(struct sbridge_dev *sbridge_dev)
{
int i;
debugf0(__FILE__ ": %s()\n", __func__);
debugf0("\n");
for (i = 0; i < sbridge_dev->n_devs; i++) {
struct pci_dev *pdev = sbridge_dev->pdev[i];
if (!pdev)
@@ -1592,8 +1592,7 @@ static void sbridge_unregister_mci(struct sbridge_dev *sbridge_dev)
struct sbridge_pvt *pvt;
if (unlikely(!mci || !mci->pvt_info)) {
debugf0("MC: " __FILE__ ": %s(): dev = %p\n",
__func__, &sbridge_dev->pdev[0]->dev);
debugf0("MC: dev = %p\n", &sbridge_dev->pdev[0]->dev);
sbridge_printk(KERN_ERR, "Couldn't find mci handler\n");
return;
@@ -1601,8 +1600,8 @@ static void sbridge_unregister_mci(struct sbridge_dev *sbridge_dev)
pvt = mci->pvt_info;
debugf0("MC: " __FILE__ ": %s(): mci = %p, dev = %p\n",
__func__, mci, &sbridge_dev->pdev[0]->dev);
debugf0("MC: mci = %p, dev = %p\n",
mci, &sbridge_dev->pdev[0]->dev);
mce_unregister_decode_chain(&sbridge_mce_dec);
@@ -1640,8 +1639,8 @@ static int sbridge_register_mci(struct sbridge_dev *sbridge_dev)
if (unlikely(!mci))
return -ENOMEM;
debugf0("MC: " __FILE__ ": %s(): mci = %p, dev = %p\n",
__func__, mci, &sbridge_dev->pdev[0]->dev);
debugf0("MC: mci = %p, dev = %p\n",
mci, &sbridge_dev->pdev[0]->dev);
pvt = mci->pvt_info;
memset(pvt, 0, sizeof(*pvt));
@@ -1676,8 +1675,7 @@ static int sbridge_register_mci(struct sbridge_dev *sbridge_dev)
/* add this new MC control structure to EDAC's list of MCs */
if (unlikely(edac_mc_add_mc(mci))) {
debugf0("MC: " __FILE__
": %s(): failed edac_mc_add_mc()\n", __func__);
debugf0("MC: failed edac_mc_add_mc()\n");
rc = -EINVAL;
goto fail0;
}
@@ -1755,7 +1753,7 @@ static void __devexit sbridge_remove(struct pci_dev *pdev)
{
struct sbridge_dev *sbridge_dev;
debugf0(__FILE__ ": %s()\n", __func__);
debugf0("\n");
/*
* we have a trouble here: pdev value for removal will be wrong, since
@@ -1804,7 +1802,7 @@ static int __init sbridge_init(void)
{
int pci_rc;
debugf2("MC: " __FILE__ ": %s()\n", __func__);
debugf2("\n");
/* Ensure that the OPSTATE is set correctly for POLL or NMI */
opstate_init();
@@ -1826,7 +1824,7 @@ static int __init sbridge_init(void)
*/
static void __exit sbridge_exit(void)
{
debugf2("MC: " __FILE__ ": %s()\n", __func__);
debugf2("\n");
pci_unregister_driver(&sbridge_driver);
}