Re: [PATCH v2] tracing: make ftrace_print_array_seq compute buf_len

2015-04-29 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 17:12:21 +0100 Javi Merino wrote: > Our maintainer missed the merge window (sigh) so the patches that were > going to use this will have to wait until linux v4.2. So they will be > users in the future, but there's no need for this to go to stable. I'll still get this in for

Re: [PATCH v2] tracing: make ftrace_print_array_seq compute buf_len

2015-04-29 Thread Javi Merino
On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 05:06:22PM +0100, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 17:02:50 +0100 > Alex Bennée wrote: > > > > > Steven Rostedt writes: > > > > > On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 16:18:46 +0100 > > > Alex Bennée wrote: > > > > > >> The only caller to this function (__print_array) was ge

Re: [PATCH v2] tracing: make ftrace_print_array_seq compute buf_len

2015-04-29 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 17:02:50 +0100 Alex Bennée wrote: > > Steven Rostedt writes: > > > On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 16:18:46 +0100 > > Alex Bennée wrote: > > > >> The only caller to this function (__print_array) was getting it wrong by > >> passing the array length instead of buffer length. As the ele

Re: [PATCH v2] tracing: make ftrace_print_array_seq compute buf_len

2015-04-29 Thread Alex Bennée
Steven Rostedt writes: > On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 16:18:46 +0100 > Alex Bennée wrote: > >> The only caller to this function (__print_array) was getting it wrong by >> passing the array length instead of buffer length. As the element size >> was already being passed for other reasons it seems reasona

Re: [PATCH v2] tracing: make ftrace_print_array_seq compute buf_len

2015-04-29 Thread Dave P Martin
On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 04:18:46PM +0100, Alex Bennée wrote: > The only caller to this function (__print_array) was getting it wrong by > passing the array length instead of buffer length. As the element size > was already being passed for other reasons it seems reasonable to push > the calculation

Re: [PATCH v2] tracing: make ftrace_print_array_seq compute buf_len

2015-04-29 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 16:18:46 +0100 Alex Bennée wrote: > The only caller to this function (__print_array) was getting it wrong by > passing the array length instead of buffer length. As the element size > was already being passed for other reasons it seems reasonable to push > the calculation of b

[PATCH v2] tracing: make ftrace_print_array_seq compute buf_len

2015-04-29 Thread Alex Bennée
The only caller to this function (__print_array) was getting it wrong by passing the array length instead of buffer length. As the element size was already being passed for other reasons it seems reasonable to push the calculation of buffer length into the function. Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée --