[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1311000648.2286.66.camel@Joe-Laptop>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 07:50:48 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>
Cc: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>, jim.cromie@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/11 re-post] dynamic_debug: use a single printk() to
emit msgs
On Mon, 2011-07-18 at 10:30 -0400, Jason Baron wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 04:46:31PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Fri, 2011-07-15 at 15:59 -0400, Jason Baron wrote:
> > > diff --git a/lib/dynamic_debug.c b/lib/dynamic_debug.c
> > > +#define LEFT(wrote) ((PREFIX_SIZE - wrote) > 0) ? (PREFIX_SIZE - wrote) : 0
[]
> > > + pos += snprintf(buf + pos, LEFT(pos), "%s", KERN_DEBUG);
> > > + if (desc->flags & _DPRINTK_FLAGS_INCL_TID) {
> > > if (in_interrupt())
> > > - snprintf(tid, sizeof(tid), "%s", "<intr> ");
> > > + pos += snprintf(buf + pos, LEFT(pos), "%s ",
> > > + "<intr>");
> > scnprintf works without using LEFT.
> > snprintf does as well.
> > http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/7/23/375
> So you're saying, just pass (PREFIX_SIZE - pos), as the second argument?
Yes.
> I see kernel code written both ways.
Perhaps one consistently used style is better than two.
> I think it's fine as written, unless you feel
> strongly about this.
You're the maintainer, do what you think best.
cheers, Joe
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists