[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d896b697-6735-e50d-00b0-2b3d9f371c99@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 19:09:29 +0200
From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To: Joe Perches <coupons@...ches.com>
Cc: linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Guoqing Jiang <gqjiang@...e.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>,
Mike Christie <mchristi@...hat.com>,
Neil Brown <neilb@...e.com>, Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>,
Tomasz Majchrzak <tomasz.majchrzak@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 37/54] md/raid5: Replace a seq_printf() call by seq_puts()
in raid5_status()
>> diff --git a/drivers/md/raid5.c b/drivers/md/raid5.c
> []
>> @@ -7044,7 +7044,7 @@ static void raid5_status(struct seq_file *seq, struct mddev *mddev)
>> rdev && test_bit(In_sync, &rdev->flags) ? "U" : "_");
>> }
>> rcu_read_unlock();
>> - seq_printf (seq, "]");
>> + seq_puts(seq, "]");
>
> seq_putc
Thanks for your update suggestion.
How do you think about the possibility that the script "checkpatch.pl" can also point
such a source code transformation out directly?
Would an additional check for the length of the passed string be useful in similar
use cases?
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists