I wrote it the original way precisely for readability; it's easier, at least
to me, to read and modify the old way.
However, in my development version I happen to be printing a lot more
stuff.
To test, I collapsed 18 of my seq_printf's into one call. That reduced the
function size by a couple hu
Am 21.10.2016 um 19:53 schrieb Theodore Ts'o:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 07:33:30PM +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
>>
>>> but (a) this isn't performance critical,
>>
>> This can be.
>
> In this case, no, it really can't possibly be performance critical.
> If you can't see why, you have no business
> When the author of the semantic patch language is telling you to stand down,
The collaboration evolved between Julia and me during the years somehow.
Different software development opinions occur then as usual.
Further opinions from contributors like you can eventually show variations
between di
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 07:33:30PM +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
>
> > but (a) this isn't performance critical,
>
> This can be.
In this case, no, it really can't possibly be performance critical.
If you can't see why, you have no business trying to send patches.
> > and (b) the number of byt
>> Is it really so difficult to interpret the suggested construction
>> of a single (and relatively small) format string?
>
> It's not so difficult, so much as it makes things worse. It's easier
> the way it originally was.
Thanks for your view on this refactoring approach.
> It might be inter
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:00:22AM +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
>
> > It is harder to see how the arguments fit into the strings
> > and it is harder to see where the strings end and the arguments begin.
>
> Is it really so difficult to interpret the suggested construction
> of a single (and r
>> +++ b/arch/hexagon/kernel/setup.c
>> @@ -132,13 +132,14 @@ static int show_cpuinfo(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
>> if (!cpu_online(cpu))
>> return 0;
>> #endif
>> -
>> -seq_printf(m, "processor\t: %d\n", cpu);
>> -seq_printf(m, "model name\t: Hexagon Virtual Machine\n"
On Fri, 21 Oct 2016, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> From: Markus Elfring
> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 08:18:38 +0200
>
> Some data were printed into a sequence by four separate function calls.
> Print the same data by a single function call instead.
>
> This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle s
From: Markus Elfring
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 08:18:38 +0200
Some data were printed into a sequence by four separate function calls.
Print the same data by a single function call instead.
This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.
Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring
---
arch/hexagon/ke
9 matches
Mail list logo
