Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 16 Feb 2008 09:13:49 -0500 | From | Mark Lord <> | Subject | Re: [PATCHSET] printk: implement printk_header() and merging printk, take #3 |
| |
Tejun Heo wrote: > Andrew Morton wrote: >>> So, I guess it's NACK w/o suggested alternatives, right? >> I wouldn't nack without good reasons, and I have none here. I don't have >> very strong opinions either way. > > I was just wondering whether I should just go with snprintf dancing in > eh_link_report, which does make sense if not many need merging printk. ..
Any chance you could poke through snprintf() and look for the off-by-one bug on the return result? (I think it happens when "n" is exceeded).
:)
| |