linux-kernel - Re: ARC-setup: Use seq_putc() in show

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <10542905-ebe1-49f5-190b-3783137e7854@synopsys.com>
Date:   Mon, 17 Oct 2016 10:23:39 -0700
From:   Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@...opsys.com>
To:     SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
CC:     "linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Alexey Brodkin <Alexey.Brodkin@...opsys.com>,
        Andrea Gelmini <andrea.gelmini@...ma.net>,
        Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>,
        "Noam Camus" <noamc@...hip.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org" <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: ARC-setup: Use seq_putc() in show_cpuinfo()

On 10/17/2016 10:19 AM, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
>>> A single character (line break) should be put into a sequence.
>>> Thus use the corresponding function "seq_putc".
>> Perhaps reword the changelog to say that seqc_putc is more efficient than
>> seqc_printf to output a single char.
>> I mean _printf is not wrong but not as efficient ?
> I came along source files for a few other software modules with similar
> change possibilities.
> Unfortunately, the corresponding developers are not convinced yet
> to replace a call of the function "seq_printf" at the end by
> a "seq_putc" because of software efficiency reasons.

I was ambivalent so far - but not anymore :-)
what is the objection - can you point me to a few links where people don't think
this is not a good idea.

> Do you find this update suggestion acceptable to some degree
> for the function "setup"?
>
> Regards,
> Markus
>