Re: [PATCH 24/27] tracing: Remove use of seq_printf return value
On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 12:20 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Sun, 22 Feb 2015 02:39:38 -0800 > Joe Perches wrote: > > > > FWIW, this one should be Cc:stable - it's a plain and simple bugfix > > > (so are all of those that used to return the result of seq_printf() from > > > ->show()). > > > > Nah, it's not really a bugfix here. > > > > Patches sent to stable should fix actual bugs or failures. > > > > Sure, it's a defect, but it's only a logical one, not an > > actual one. It doesn't/can't fail in practice. > > > > This is only a single symbol and so it can't overflow the > > initial allocation. > > > > Besides that, the return value of the containing function > > is ignored. > > > > Right, there's nothing that will actually break with the current code. > The return value is ignored in the one place it is used. And no new > code is going to expect a result. > > It's a fix that's fine for the next merge window. It's not even > important enough to get into this window. All of these "int->void seq_" changes are for 4.1 or whatever the next version is going to be called. And I think date based kernel versioning like would have been better. -- 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/
Re: [PATCH 24/27] tracing: Remove use of seq_printf return value
On Sun, 22 Feb 2015 02:39:38 -0800 Joe Perches wrote: > > FWIW, this one should be Cc:stable - it's a plain and simple bugfix > > (so are all of those that used to return the result of seq_printf() from > > ->show()). > > Nah, it's not really a bugfix here. > > Patches sent to stable should fix actual bugs or failures. > > Sure, it's a defect, but it's only a logical one, not an > actual one. It doesn't/can't fail in practice. > > This is only a single symbol and so it can't overflow the > initial allocation. > > Besides that, the return value of the containing function > is ignored. > Right, there's nothing that will actually break with the current code. The return value is ignored in the one place it is used. And no new code is going to expect a result. It's a fix that's fine for the next merge window. It's not even important enough to get into this window. -- 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/
Re: [PATCH 24/27] tracing: Remove use of seq_printf return value
On Sun, 22 Feb 2015 02:39:38 -0800 Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote: FWIW, this one should be Cc:stable - it's a plain and simple bugfix (so are all of those that used to return the result of seq_printf() from -show()). Nah, it's not really a bugfix here. Patches sent to stable should fix actual bugs or failures. Sure, it's a defect, but it's only a logical one, not an actual one. It doesn't/can't fail in practice. This is only a single symbol and so it can't overflow the initial allocation. Besides that, the return value of the containing function is ignored. Right, there's nothing that will actually break with the current code. The return value is ignored in the one place it is used. And no new code is going to expect a result. It's a fix that's fine for the next merge window. It's not even important enough to get into this window. -- 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/
Re: [PATCH 24/27] tracing: Remove use of seq_printf return value
On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 12:20 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: On Sun, 22 Feb 2015 02:39:38 -0800 Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote: FWIW, this one should be Cc:stable - it's a plain and simple bugfix (so are all of those that used to return the result of seq_printf() from -show()). Nah, it's not really a bugfix here. Patches sent to stable should fix actual bugs or failures. Sure, it's a defect, but it's only a logical one, not an actual one. It doesn't/can't fail in practice. This is only a single symbol and so it can't overflow the initial allocation. Besides that, the return value of the containing function is ignored. Right, there's nothing that will actually break with the current code. The return value is ignored in the one place it is used. And no new code is going to expect a result. It's a fix that's fine for the next merge window. It's not even important enough to get into this window. All of these int-void seq_foo changes are for 4.1 or whatever the next version is going to be called. And I think date based kernel versioning like .mm.v would have been better. -- 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/
Re: [PATCH 24/27] tracing: Remove use of seq_printf return value
On Sun, 2015-02-22 at 04:41 +, Al Viro wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 10:54:09PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Sat, 21 Feb 2015 18:53:51 -0800 Joe Perches wrote:
> >
> > > The seq_printf return value, because it's frequently misused,
> > > will eventually be converted to void.
> > >
> > > See: commit 1f33c41c03da ("seq_file: Rename seq_overflow() to
> > > seq_has_overflowed() and make public")
> > >
> > > Miscellanea:
> > >
> > > o Remove unused return value from trace_lookup_stack
> >
> > Acked-by: Steven Rostedt
>
> FWIW, this one should be Cc:stable - it's a plain and simple bugfix
> (so are all of those that used to return the result of seq_printf() from
> ->show()).
Nah, it's not really a bugfix here.
Patches sent to stable should fix actual bugs or failures.
Sure, it's a defect, but it's only a logical one, not an
actual one. It doesn't/can't fail in practice.
This is only a single symbol and so it can't overflow the
initial allocation.
Besides that, the return value of the containing function
is ignored.
--
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/
Re: [PATCH 24/27] tracing: Remove use of seq_printf return value
On Sun, 2015-02-22 at 04:41 +, Al Viro wrote: On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 10:54:09PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: On Sat, 21 Feb 2015 18:53:51 -0800 Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote: The seq_printf return value, because it's frequently misused, will eventually be converted to void. See: commit 1f33c41c03da (seq_file: Rename seq_overflow() to seq_has_overflowed() and make public) Miscellanea: o Remove unused return value from trace_lookup_stack Acked-by: Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org FWIW, this one should be Cc:stable - it's a plain and simple bugfix (so are all of those that used to return the result of seq_printf() from -show()). Nah, it's not really a bugfix here. Patches sent to stable should fix actual bugs or failures. Sure, it's a defect, but it's only a logical one, not an actual one. It doesn't/can't fail in practice. This is only a single symbol and so it can't overflow the initial allocation. Besides that, the return value of the containing function is ignored. -- 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/
Re: [PATCH 24/27] tracing: Remove use of seq_printf return value
On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 10:54:09PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Feb 2015 18:53:51 -0800
> Joe Perches wrote:
>
> > The seq_printf return value, because it's frequently misused,
> > will eventually be converted to void.
> >
> > See: commit 1f33c41c03da ("seq_file: Rename seq_overflow() to
> > seq_has_overflowed() and make public")
> >
> > Miscellanea:
> >
> > o Remove unused return value from trace_lookup_stack
>
> Acked-by: Steven Rostedt
FWIW, this one should be Cc:stable - it's a plain and simple bugfix
(so are all of those that used to return the result of seq_printf() from
->show()).
--
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/
Re: [PATCH 24/27] tracing: Remove use of seq_printf return value
On Sat, 21 Feb 2015 18:53:51 -0800
Joe Perches wrote:
> The seq_printf return value, because it's frequently misused,
> will eventually be converted to void.
>
> See: commit 1f33c41c03da ("seq_file: Rename seq_overflow() to
> seq_has_overflowed() and make public")
>
> Miscellanea:
>
> o Remove unused return value from trace_lookup_stack
Acked-by: Steven Rostedt
-- Steve
>
> Signed-off-by: Joe Perches
> ---
> kernel/trace/trace_stack.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c b/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c
> index c3e4fcf..3f34496 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c
> @@ -327,11 +327,11 @@ static void t_stop(struct seq_file *m, void *p)
> local_irq_enable();
> }
>
> -static int trace_lookup_stack(struct seq_file *m, long i)
> +static void trace_lookup_stack(struct seq_file *m, long i)
> {
> unsigned long addr = stack_dump_trace[i];
>
> - return seq_printf(m, "%pS\n", (void *)addr);
> + seq_printf(m, "%pS\n", (void *)addr);
> }
>
> static void print_disabled(struct seq_file *m)
--
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/
Re: [PATCH 24/27] tracing: Remove use of seq_printf return value
On Sat, 21 Feb 2015 18:53:51 -0800
Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote:
The seq_printf return value, because it's frequently misused,
will eventually be converted to void.
See: commit 1f33c41c03da (seq_file: Rename seq_overflow() to
seq_has_overflowed() and make public)
Miscellanea:
o Remove unused return value from trace_lookup_stack
Acked-by: Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org
-- Steve
Signed-off-by: Joe Perches j...@perches.com
---
kernel/trace/trace_stack.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c b/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c
index c3e4fcf..3f34496 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/trace_stack.c
@@ -327,11 +327,11 @@ static void t_stop(struct seq_file *m, void *p)
local_irq_enable();
}
-static int trace_lookup_stack(struct seq_file *m, long i)
+static void trace_lookup_stack(struct seq_file *m, long i)
{
unsigned long addr = stack_dump_trace[i];
- return seq_printf(m, %pS\n, (void *)addr);
+ seq_printf(m, %pS\n, (void *)addr);
}
static void print_disabled(struct seq_file *m)
--
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/
Re: [PATCH 24/27] tracing: Remove use of seq_printf return value
On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 10:54:09PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: On Sat, 21 Feb 2015 18:53:51 -0800 Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote: The seq_printf return value, because it's frequently misused, will eventually be converted to void. See: commit 1f33c41c03da (seq_file: Rename seq_overflow() to seq_has_overflowed() and make public) Miscellanea: o Remove unused return value from trace_lookup_stack Acked-by: Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org FWIW, this one should be Cc:stable - it's a plain and simple bugfix (so are all of those that used to return the result of seq_printf() from -show()). -- 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/
