Re: [RFC][PATCH 07/12 v3] tracing: Have seq_buf use full buffer

2014-11-10 Thread Petr Mladek
On Fri 2014-11-07 13:37:29, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > Some more touch ups. > > -- Steve > > From 7e724556c21178a9890b31ff57f69761b41f435a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: "Steven Rostedt (Red Hat)" > Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 15:26:09 -0400 > Subject: [PATCH] tracing: Have seq_buf use full buffer

Re: [RFC][PATCH 07/12 v3] tracing: Have seq_buf use full buffer

2014-11-07 Thread Steven Rostedt
Some more touch ups. -- Steve >From 7e724556c21178a9890b31ff57f69761b41f435a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Steven Rostedt (Red Hat)" Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 15:26:09 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] tracing: Have seq_buf use full buffer Currently seq_buf is full when all but one byte of the buffer is f

Re: [RFC][PATCH 07/12 v3] tracing: Have seq_buf use full buffer

2014-11-07 Thread Petr Mladek
On Thu 2014-11-06 14:24:02, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 16:31:07 +0100 > Petr Mladek wrote: > > > > I like the idea of having the exception only in the bitmap code and filling > > the whole buffer in other cases. > > > > I am now in doubts about the overflow state. A solution wo

Re: [RFC][PATCH 07/12 v3] tracing: Have seq_buf use full buffer

2014-11-06 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 16:31:07 +0100 Petr Mladek wrote: > I like the idea of having the exception only in the bitmap code and filling > the whole buffer in other cases. > > I am now in doubts about the overflow state. A solution would > be to add an "overflow" flag to struct seq_bug. I agree that

Re: [RFC][PATCH 07/12 v3] tracing: Have seq_buf use full buffer

2014-11-06 Thread Petr Mladek
On Wed 2014-11-05 16:06:18, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 5 Nov 2014 15:21:30 -0500 > Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > > > > I wonder if we want this change at all. It means that we are not able to > > > detect overflow in some functions. It is pity because the users > > > might want to increase

Re: [RFC][PATCH 07/12 v3] tracing: Have seq_buf use full buffer

2014-11-06 Thread Petr Mladek
On Wed 2014-11-05 15:21:30, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 5 Nov 2014 17:31:50 +0100 > Petr Mladek wrote: > > > > > /** > > > * seq_buf_print_seq - move the contents of seq_buf into a seq_file > > > @@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ int seq_buf_vprintf(struct seq_buf *s, const char *fmt, > > > va_list args

Re: [RFC][PATCH 07/12 v3] tracing: Have seq_buf use full buffer

2014-11-05 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 5 Nov 2014 15:21:30 -0500 Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > I wonder if we want this change at all. It means that we are not able to > > detect overflow in some functions. It is pity because the users > > might want to increase the buffer size and try again if the print > > was incomplete.

Re: [RFC][PATCH 07/12 v3] tracing: Have seq_buf use full buffer

2014-11-05 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 5 Nov 2014 17:31:50 +0100 Petr Mladek wrote: > > /** > > * seq_buf_print_seq - move the contents of seq_buf into a seq_file > > @@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ int seq_buf_vprintf(struct seq_buf *s, const char *fmt, > > va_list args) > > > > if (s->len < s->size) { > > len = vsnp

Re: [RFC][PATCH 07/12 v3] tracing: Have seq_buf use full buffer

2014-11-05 Thread Petr Mladek
On Tue 2014-11-04 10:52:44, Steven Rostedt wrote: > From: "Steven Rostedt (Red Hat)" > > Currently seq_buf is full when all but one byte of the buffer is > filled. Change it so that the seq_buf is full when all of the > buffer is filled. > > Some of the functions would fill the buffer completely