On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 17:07:58 -0800 Joe Perches <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Look at the next patch. > > I don't have it and you are not cc'ing me. It's on LKML. > I think you are getting carried away with the helpers. That's nice. > > > > I don't see it making mistakes more or less > > > likely, I just see it being used to avoid > > > setting the overflow state which seems like > > > more of an error than anything else. > > > > > > Why avoid setting overflow at all? > [] > > It has nothing to do with overflow. Where did you get that from? > > writing to seq_buf really only cares about overflow. > > seq_buf -> write to buffer -> overflowed? > expand buffer, redo everything else when finished, > dump buffer Um, that may be the case for seq_file, but it is not the case for trace_seq. seq_buf is influenced by seq_file because I have a patch to make seq_file use it, but it's also the guts of trace_seq that has some different requirements. And it's also not the case with the users of seq_buf in the last patch. -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
