Messages in this thread | | | From | "Yu, Lang" <> | Subject | RE: [PATCH] sysfs: Remove page boundary align limitation on sysfs_emit and sysfs_emit_at | Date | Wed, 8 Sep 2021 13:21:16 +0000 |
| |
[AMD Official Use Only]
>-----Original Message----- >From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> >Sent: Wednesday, September 8, 2021 9:04 PM >To: Yu, Lang <Lang.Yu@amd.com> >Cc: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>; Rafael J . Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org>; >linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >Subject: Re: [PATCH] sysfs: Remove page boundary align limitation on sysfs_emit >and sysfs_emit_at > >A: >https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipe >dia.org%2Fwiki%2FTop_post&data=04%7C01%7CLang.Yu%40amd.com%7C >fed047de547541548fcc08d972c92627%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d >%7C0%7C0%7C637667030534349355%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoi >MC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000& >amp;sdata=LHujj041jxZjvoYxVYUKtNr7us%2FX4pl%2FdOkFSOP1W8U%3D&r >eserved=0 >Q: Were do I find info about this thing called top-posting? >A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. >Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? >A: Top-posting. >Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? > >A: No. >Q: Should I include quotations after my reply? > >https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdaringfire >ball.net%2F2007%2F07%2Fon_top&data=04%7C01%7CLang.Yu%40amd.co >m%7Cfed047de547541548fcc08d972c92627%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d99 >4e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637667030534349355%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8ey >JWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C >1000&sdata=AOLGBdj01XiEjhmsBSGTNuqejgU%2B6jg416Paz5XdM1A%3D&a >mp;reserved=0 > > >On Wed, Sep 08, 2021 at 12:52:43PM +0000, Yu, Lang wrote: >> [AMD Official Use Only] >> >> Thanks for your reply. >> Just curious if we don't put such a limitation, what are the consequences? >> If we remove the limitation, sys_emit/sys_emit_at api will be more flexible. >> Since the comments of sysfs_emit/ sys_emit_at api are " sysfs_emit - >> scnprintf equivalent, aware of PAGE_SIZE buffer. ", Why not make them >> more equivalent with scnprintf? > >Because this is not a general replacement for scnprintf(), it is only to be used with >sysfs files. > >Where else are you wanting to use these functions that this patch woulud be >required that does not haver to deal with sysfs? > >thanks, > >greg k-h
But some guys think it is a general replacement for scnprintf(), and recommend that use sysfs_emit() instead of scnprintf(), and send many patches that replace scnprintf() with sysfs_emit(), and finally cause some invalid sysfs_emit_at: buf:00000000f19bdfde warnings. I think we better not put " scnprintf equivalent, aware of PAGE_SIZE buffer " words in comments. It is obviously not. Some guys are misled by that. Thanks!
Regards, Lang
| |