Messages in this thread | | | From | Rasmus Villemoes <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] lib: list_sort: Various minor improvements | Date | Thu, 26 Jun 2014 00:28:18 +0200 |
| |
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> writes:
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 12:06:27 +0200 Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk> wrote: > >> Reading the source of lib/list_sort.c, I came up with a few possible >> improvements. I think 4/4 may be a bit controversial, but 1/4, 2/4 and >> 3/4 should be straightforward. >> > > All looks OK to me.
Thanks.
> We may as well do the pr_foo() conversion as well. As often happens, > the results are quite pleasing. > > --- a/lib/list_sort.c~lib-list_sortc-convert-to-pr_foo > +++ a/lib/list_sort.c > @@ -1,3 +1,6 @@ > + > +#define pr_fmt(fmt) "list_sort_test: " fmt > + > #include <linux/kernel.h> > #include <linux/module.h> > #include <linux/list_sort.h> > @@ -125,9 +128,8 @@ void list_sort(void *priv, struct list_h > } > if (lev > max_lev) { > if (unlikely(lev >= ARRAY_SIZE(part)-1)) { > - printk_once(KERN_DEBUG "list passed to" > - " list_sort() too long for" > - " efficiency\n"); > + pr_debug_once("list passed to list_sort() too " > + "long for efficiency\n");
Minor comment: Won't this end up saying "list_sort_test: list passed to ...", despite the list coming from a 'real' user? Maybe change the first #define to '"list_sort: " fmt', the above message to "passed list too long for efficiency", and redefine pr_fmt right after #ifdef CONFIG_TEST_LIST_SORT.
Rasmus
| |