[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJ-ks9=Bf42eojROr1X+BnmeQLa=zF7EAr4Y3n2exwZXum+rbQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 10:50:33 -0500
From: Tamir Duberstein <tamird@...il.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/3] scanf: remove redundant debug logs
On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 10:42 AM Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 10:13:37AM -0500, Tamir Duberstein wrote:
> > The test already prints the same information on failure; remove
> > redundant pr_debug() logs.
>
> ...
>
> > #define _check_numbers_template(arg_fmt, expect, str, fmt, n_args, ap) \
> > do { \
> > - pr_debug("\"%s\", \"%s\" ->\n", str, fmt); \
>
> What *if* the n_args == 0 here?
Then there's no assertion in this block, so the test cannot possibly fail here.
> > for (; n_args > 0; n_args--, expect++) { \
> > typeof(*expect) got = *va_arg(ap, typeof(expect)); \
> > - pr_debug("\t" arg_fmt "\n", got); \
> > if (got != *expect) { \
> > pr_warn("vsscanf(\"%s\", \"%s\", ...) expected " arg_fmt " got " arg_fmt "\n", \
> > str, fmt, *expect, got); \
> > @@ -689,7 +687,6 @@ do { \
> > total_tests++; \
> > len = snprintf(test_buffer, BUF_SIZE, gen_fmt, expect); \
> > got = (fn)(test_buffer, &endp, base); \
> > - pr_debug(#fn "(\"%s\", %d) -> " gen_fmt "\n", test_buffer, base, got); \
> > if (got != (expect)) { \
> > fail = true; \
> > pr_warn(#fn "(\"%s\", %d): got " gen_fmt " expected " gen_fmt "\n", \
>
> --
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists