On Wed, 2014-10-29 at 20:10 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 16:53:30 -0700 > Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, 2014-10-29 at 19:42 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 15:08:36 -0700 Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2014-10-29 at 17:56 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > > +A true return from seq_has_overflowed means that the seq_file buffer > > > > > is full > > > > > +and further output will be discarded. > > > > Perhaps the description is a bit unclear here. > > > > Doesn't a return of true to seq_has_overflowed mean that > > > > more characters have already been written than the buffer > > > > can accept? > > > Actually, right now the comment is correct and the name is misleading. > > > But I have a patch that will make the comment incorrect (and will be > > > fixed) and the name correct. > > > > > > But since seq_has_overflowed() is to be used throughout the kernel, I > > > didn't want to have to go do patches all over again for a temporary > > > misnomer. > > > > I think it'd be better if the first submission > > of the function has the correct operation for > > the name. > > I'm hoping that both of these will make it into 3.19, so it really > doesn't matter the order. I'm working on this patch first, because, as > you said earlier, it is important to get the call to > seq_has_overflowed() out there.
So, given the necessary sequence of adding this new function before any other change is made, please make this function correct at the get-go. -- 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/
