On Mon 2014-10-27 16:17:24, Steven Rostedt wrote: > Note, I've started with Joe's patches and I'm massaging them for > something I can work with. > > On Tue, 30 Sep 2014 12:34:35 +0200 > Petr Mladek <pmla...@suse.cz> wrote: > > > > > - rv = seq_printf(s, "\"\nInvalid master %d\n", > > > - res->res_nodeid); > > > - if (rv) > > > + seq_printf(s, "\"\nInvalid master %d\n", res->res_nodeid); > > > + if (seq_is_full(s)) > > > goto out; > > > > I would check for seq_overflow() > > > > Etc. There are needed many more changes if we agree on introducing > > seq_is_full() and seq_overflow(). > > As I'm looking at this code, I'm thinking that we never > really care about seq_is_full(). We only really care if > seq_overflowed(), in which the contents will be discarded. > > Rational? Because if we break when seq_is_full(), my new logic wont > throw away the result. If we break out of the function when it's full > and not when it has overflowed, then we may never print out the rest of > the content, as the seq_file code will still use a full buffer that > hasn't overflowed. > > I'm thinking of switching everything to use seq_has_overflowed() and > try again. > > Thoughts?
Sounds good to me. Best Regards, Petr -- 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/
