On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 08:46:50 -0700 Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-09-29 at 11:25 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > Anyway, that should be a second patch, and we should get my current > > patch (the one to make putc and puts the same) in first, as that > > actually fixes the inconsistency between the two. > > > > I'll post another patch to try to make seq_file operations a bit more > > consistent. Perhaps we can have m->count be what would have been > > written. > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/9/11/801 > That has nothing to do with what I'm working on. I'm not touching the return value of the seq_*() functions. I may make them all return void though. I may just make m->count == m->size + 1 for all cases. The m->count == what would have been written is if seq_buf() needs it. Which I highly doubt it would. -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
