On (10/09/18 10:42), Petr Mladek wrote: > On Tue 2018-10-02 11:38:36, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > > We have a proper 'overflow' check which tells us that we need to > > split up existing cont buffer in separate records: > > > > if (cont.len + len > sizeof(cont.buf)) > > cont_flush(); > > > > At the same time we also have one extra flush: "if cont buffer is > > 80% full then split it up" in cont_add(): > > > > if (cont.len > (sizeof(cont.buf) * 80) / 100) > > cont_flush(); > > > > This looks to be redundant, since the existing "overflow" check > > should work just fine, so remove this 80% check and wait for either > > a normal cont termination \n, for preliminary flush due to > > possible buffer overflow or for preliminary flush due to cont race. > > > > Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhat...@gmail.com> > > I wonder if this check ever triggered ;-) It is a nice clean up: > > Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmla...@suse.com>
Thanks. -ss