[lkml]   [2019]   [Mar]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/2] Remove support for deprecated %pf and %pF in vsprintf
On Sun, Mar 24, 2019 at 11:10:08PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 07:05:50PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 03:53:50PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> >
> > > Porting a patch
> > > forward should have no issues either as has been complaining
> > > of the use of %pf and %pF for a while now.
> >
> > And that's exactly the reason why I think instead of removing warning on
> > checkpatch, it makes sense to convert to an error for a while. People are
> > tending read documentation on internet and thus might have outdated one. And
> > yes, the compiler doesn't tell a thing about it.
> >
> > P.S. Though, if majority of people will tell that I'm wrong, then it's okay to
> > remove.
> I wonder if you wrote this before seeing my other patchset.

Yes, I wrote it before seeing another series.

> What I think could be done is to warn of plain %pf (without following "w")
> in, and %pf that is not followed by "w" in the kernel.
> Although we didn't have such checks to begin with. The case is still a
> little bit different as %pf used to be a valid conversion specifier whereas
> %pO likely has never existed.
> So, how about adding such checks in the other set? I can retain %p[fF] check
> here, too, if you like.

Consistency tells me that the warning->error transformation in
belongs this series.

With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

 \ /
  Last update: 2019-03-24 22:19    [W:0.066 / U:10.616 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site