On 01/20/2017 09:51 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Andrew,
On 12 January 2017 at 09:19, Andrew F. Davis afd@ti.com wrote:
Signed-off-by: Andrew F. Davis afd@ti.com
common/spl/spl.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/common/spl/spl.c b/common/spl/spl.c index a76ea3a603..e43718de62 100644 --- a/common/spl/spl.c +++ b/common/spl/spl.c @@ -316,7 +316,7 @@ static int boot_from_devices(struct spl_image_info *spl_image, loader = spl_ll_find_loader(spl_boot_list[i]); #if defined(CONFIG_SPL_SERIAL_SUPPORT) && defined(CONFIG_SPL_LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT) if (loader)
printf("Trying to boot from %s", loader->name);
printf("Trying to boot from %s\n", loader->name); else puts("SPL: Unsupported Boot Device!\n");#endif @@ -389,7 +389,7 @@ void board_init_r(gd_t *dummy1, ulong dummy2) gd->malloc_ptr / 1024); #endif
debug("loaded - jumping to U-Boot...");
debug("loaded - jumping to U-Boot...\n");I prefer this one as it is, since U-Boot prints a few newlines anyway, and this way we can have the cursor at the end of the 'jumping' line until U-Boot starts.
What's the rationale for changing it. Could you add a commit message?
Looks like this already has be taken, but I'll explain myself anyway.
The way I see it, for consistency sake, the only reason a print statement should not end in a newline is iff they expect something to be printed on the same line after. This is not the case here, we *do* want a newline after this statement, we are just expecting it to be handled later (hopefully). Not sticking to this standard will lead to a lot of print statements starting with '\n' to be safe. For instance even if we knew what follows should emit some newlines, this is a debug statement, it may not printed, so the following line would still have to begin with a newline "just in-case", we would end up with half our print out lines with two new lines above them.
Andrew