[PATCH 5/5] mtd: Don't print a scary message when trying to remove a busy MTD

[Boris Brezillon]

On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 20:48:40 +0200
Richard Weinberger <richard at nod.at> wrote:

> Boris,
> 
> Am 07.07.2016 um 16:58 schrieb Boris Brezillon:
> > On Tue,  5 Jul 2016 00:06:23 +0200
> > Richard Weinberger <richard at nod.at> wrote:
> >   
> >> Just return -EBUSY and everything is fine.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <richard at nod.at>
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c | 6 ++----
> >>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c b/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c
> >> index f49e103..f2dea88 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c
> >> @@ -499,11 +499,9 @@ int del_mtd_device(struct mtd_info *mtd)
> >>  		goto out_error;
> >>  	}
> >>  
> >> -	if (mtd->usecount) {
> >> -		printk(KERN_NOTICE "Removing MTD device #%d (%s) with use count %d\n",
> >> -		       mtd->index, mtd->name, mtd->usecount);
> >> +	if (mtd->usecount)
> >>  		ret = -EBUSY;
> >> -	} else {
> >> +	else {  
> > 
> > Nit: can you keep the brackets around the if (mtd->usecount) block (we
> > usually only drop them when both the 'if' and 'else' blocks contain
> > a single instruction)?
> >   
> 
> As discussed on IRC, the current kernel coding style is fine with that.

That's not what's described in Documentation/CodingStyle [1], but for
reason checkpatch is not complaining (I thought it was, but maybe this
rule has been relaxed).

I still find it clearer to have brackets in this case, but I'll let
Brian decide.

[1]http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/Documentation/CodingStyle#L168