Russell King wrote:
>On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 10:05:00PM +0200, Pierre Ossman wrote:
>
>
>>Russell King wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I'd prefer this to be:
>>>
>>> printk(KERN_INFO "%s: %s %s %dKiB%s\n",
>>> md->disk->disk_name, mmc_card_id(card), mmc_card_name(card),
>>> (card->csd.capacity << card->csd.read_blkbits) / 1024,
>>> card->csd.cmdclass & CCC_BLOCK_WRITE ? "" : " (ro)");
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>I'd rather not since the SD patches have a similar test but on a
>>different condition.
>>
>>
>
>That's just a case of adding another %s and ?:. I'd really prefer it
>to be done this way.
>
>
>
Well that would turn out something like:
printk(KERN_INFO "%s: %s %s %dKiB%s\n",
md->disk->disk_name, mmc_card_id(card), mmc_card_name(card),
(card->csd.capacity << card->csd.read_blkbits) / 1024,
(!(card->csd.cmdclass & CCC_BLOCK_WRITE) ||
mmc_card_readonly(card)) ? " (ro)" : "");
which is a bit messy IMHO.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
