Re: seq_putc is preferable to seq_puts

On Fri, 2018-05-18 at 10:50 -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > and a trivial script to convert them all treewide > > $ git grep -P --name-only > '\b(?:seq_puts|seq_printf)\s*\(\s*[^,]+,\s*"(?:\\.|.)"\s*\)\s*;' | \ > xargs perl -i -e 'local $/; while (<>) { >

Re: seq_putc is preferable to seq_puts

On Fri, 2018-05-18 at 10:50 -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > and a trivial script to convert them all treewide > > $ git grep -P --name-only > '\b(?:seq_puts|seq_printf)\s*\(\s*[^,]+,\s*"(?:\\.|.)"\s*\)\s*;' | \ > xargs perl -i -e 'local $/; while (<>) { >

Re: seq_putc is preferable to seq_puts

On Fri, 2018-05-18 at 07:09 -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > Hi Joe, > > A nice checkpatch addition would be to look for seq_puts(x, "s") > and recommend the author use seq_putc(x, 's') instead. The primary > offender is seq_puts(x, "\n") (a hundred or so, scattered throughout > the kernel), but

Re: seq_putc is preferable to seq_puts

On Fri, 2018-05-18 at 07:09 -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > Hi Joe, > > A nice checkpatch addition would be to look for seq_puts(x, "s") > and recommend the author use seq_putc(x, 's') instead. The primary > offender is seq_puts(x, "\n") (a hundred or so, scattered throughout > the kernel), but

seq_putc is preferable to seq_puts

Hi Joe, A nice checkpatch addition would be to look for seq_puts(x, "s") and recommend the author use seq_putc(x, 's') instead. The primary offender is seq_puts(x, "\n") (a hundred or so, scattered throughout the kernel), but seq_puts(x, " ") has its adherents too.

seq_putc is preferable to seq_puts

Hi Joe, A nice checkpatch addition would be to look for seq_puts(x, "s") and recommend the author use seq_putc(x, 's') instead. The primary offender is seq_puts(x, "\n") (a hundred or so, scattered throughout the kernel), but seq_puts(x, " ") has its adherents too.