[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141117202432.0376417f@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 20:24:32 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 20/26 v5] seq_buf: Add seq_buf_can_fit() helper function
On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 17:07:58 -0800
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> > Look at the next patch.
>
> I don't have it and you are not cc'ing me.
It's on LKML.
> I think you are getting carried away with the helpers.
That's nice.
>
> > > I don't see it making mistakes more or less
> > > likely, I just see it being used to avoid
> > > setting the overflow state which seems like
> > > more of an error than anything else.
> > >
> > > Why avoid setting overflow at all?
> []
> > It has nothing to do with overflow. Where did you get that from?
>
> writing to seq_buf really only cares about overflow.
>
> seq_buf -> write to buffer -> overflowed?
> expand buffer, redo everything else when finished,
> dump buffer
Um, that may be the case for seq_file, but it is not the case for
trace_seq. seq_buf is influenced by seq_file because I have a patch to
make seq_file use it, but it's also the guts of trace_seq that has some
different requirements. And it's also not the case with the users of
seq_buf in the last patch.
-- Steve
--
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