[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d4d6c5ec-f884-4942-b90e-a3b58edd1e4e@web.de>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2024 08:42:07 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>, x86@...nel.org,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, Fenghua Yu
<fenghua.yu@...el.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...ia.fr>
Subject: Re: x86/resctrl: Use seq_putc() in two functions
>> Single characters should be put into a sequence.
>> Thus use the corresponding function “seq_putc”.
>>
>> This issue was transformed by using the Coccinelle software.
>
> Could you please point me to how you accomplished this?
…
Maybe.
> Is this a new coccinelle script outside of the kernel
I constructed small scripts for the semantic patch language according to
the presented code refactoring a while ago.
> or still on its way upstream?
I am curious if such a transformation approach can eventually be integrated
for the coccicheck tool.
> Could you please highlight the benefit of this change? Looking at seq_puts() implementation, thanks
> to [1], it seems to me these seq_puts() calls will result in seq_putc() anyway?
If the appropriate function call would be directly used, extra optimisation efforts can be avoided
by the compiler.
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists