Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 28 Oct 2014 10:36:36 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 7/7] docg3: Fix miuse of seq_printf return value | From | Brian Norris <> |
| |
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 10:32 AM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 10:27:40 -0700 > Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote: >> On Tue, 2014-10-28 at 12:05 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> > On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 08:57:57 -0700 >> > Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote: >> > >> > > On Tue, 2014-10-28 at 11:13 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> > > > I'm going to be working on changes to remove the return value of >> > > > seq_printf() and friends. >> > > >> > > I'm sure you know all of this, but for anyone else: >> > > >> > > This doesn't need to be done in a single pass. >> > >> > Yeah, I took a look at all the places, and I've decided to take it off >> > in chunks. I'm starting with the ones you posted, and will try to get >> > acks for them. And then go after other chunks as I have time. >> > >> > I would like to get this done before I do my merge of trace_seq and >> > seq_file, but I'm thinking I may have to do that in parallel. >> >> I think the most important thing is to get the >> seq_is_overflown (or seq_has_overflowed or whatever >> other name is chosen) function added then the rest >> of the patches can be applied whenever maintainers >> (or Andrew or trivial or ...) pick them up. > > I can get that in without much of an issue. But the merge of trace_seq > and seq_file would be easier if I didn't have to worry about return > values. Which is why I want to get this in quickly.
Whatever you'd like. Please, have my ack and keep the patch in your own branch!
Acked-by: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>
It's no problem if we both have the patch, is it? Or if I see it in linux-next, then I may drop it from my tree.
Regards, Brian
| |