[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+8MBbJefz7L-C-LnhAAXB5zf-8XoMPhESPU4yd0wnuZ_YqO1w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 11:58:17 -0700
From: Tony Luck <tony.luck@...il.com>
To: Richard Weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>
Cc: Madper Xie <cxie@...hat.com>, Seiji Aguchi <seiji.aguchi@....com>,
"matt.fleming@...el.com" <matt.fleming@...el.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux EFI <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
谢成骏 <bbboson@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make efi-pstore return a unique id
>> +static u64 efi_generate_id(unsigned long timestamp, unsigned int part, int count)
I don't think the "efi_" prefix is needed here. For one thing the
function is static, so
no name space pollution worries. For another - it makes it look like
this is some thing
defined in EFI standard. If "generate_id()" is too generic for your
tastes ... then a
"pstore_" prefix might be more appropriate.
>> +{
>> + char id_str[64];
>> + u64 id = 0;
>> +
>> + sprintf(id_str, "%lu%u%d", timestamp, part, count);
>> + if (kstrtoull(id_str, 10, &id))
>> + pr_warn("efi-pstore: failed to generate id\n");
>> + return id;
>> +}
>
> This is just odd. You make a string from three ints and then a parse
> it to a int again.
Agreed. I liked your ((timestamp * 100 + part) * 100 + count function much
more than this.
-Tony
--
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