[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c65a43b1711dfba3749d7e3022589c7c652e83c4.camel@perches.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 09:58:25 -0800
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Tobin C . Harding" <me@...in.cc>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 5/9] vsprintf: Factor out %pV handler as va_format()
On Tue, 2019-02-12 at 14:00 +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Fri 2019-02-08 09:11:17, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Fri, 2019-02-08 at 16:23 +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > > Move the code from the long pointer() function. We are going to improve
> > > error handling that will make it more complicated.
> > >
> > > This patch does not change the existing behavior.
> >
> > But doesn't this increase stack use?
> > %pV is recursive and increasing the stack is undesired
> > for this use.
>
> %pV handler is stack sensitive because the entire vsnprintf()
> machinery is called recursively. This one extra call does
> not make it much worse.
That's an argument?.
Refactoring is good, but you need to add
__always_inline here.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists