linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scsi: libsas: Use str_plural() in _sas_resume

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2024 10:33:17 +0100
From: John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>
To: Jiapeng Chong <jiapeng.chong@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: yanaijie@...wei.com, James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com,
        martin.petersen@...cle.com, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Abaci Robot <abaci@...ux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: libsas: Use str_plural() in _sas_resume_ha()

On 18/06/2024 08:44, Jiapeng Chong wrote:
> Use existing str_plural() function rather than duplicating its
> implementation.
> 
> ./drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_init.c:426:7-8: opportunity for str_plural(i).
> 
> Reported-by: Abaci Robot <abaci@...ux.alibaba.com>
> Closes: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://bugzilla.openanolis.cn/show_bug.cgi?id=9351__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!Nk42u-g6x28V1UUeWge3hrl1nLg33NAY5X2JMyTeC3VEMsYPh4q3Tr6OYXMtxHEj16ZsS_-eV3fHIvS5qevQliZxzvj9NdOu$

I don't see why the kernel commit history should be polluted with such info.

> Signed-off-by: Jiapeng Chong <jiapeng.chong@...ux.alibaba.com>
> ---
>   drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_init.c | 4 ++--
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_init.c b/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_init.c
> index 9c8cc723170d..67017c03d4da 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_init.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_init.c
> @@ -422,8 +422,8 @@ static void _sas_resume_ha(struct sas_ha_struct *ha, bool drain)
>   	 */
>   	i = phys_suspended(ha);
>   	if (i)
> -		dev_info(ha->dev, "waiting up to 25 seconds for %d phy%s to resume\n",
> -			 i, i > 1 ? "s" : "");
> +		dev_info(ha->dev, "waiting up to 25 seconds for %d phy%s to resume\n", i,
> +			 str_plural(i));

Is this really better?

I actually think that the following is preferable:
"waiting up to 25 seconds for %d phy(s) to resume\n", i);

>   	wait_event_timeout(ha->eh_wait_q, phys_suspended(ha) == 0, tmo);
>   	for (i = 0; i < ha->num_phys; i++) {
>   		struct asd_sas_phy *phy = ha->sas_phy[i];