Re: [PATCH 0/6] md: Fine-tuning for some function implementations
Date: Tue May 02 2017 - 17:37:10 EST
On Tue, May 02 2017, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> From: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Tue, 2 May 2017 16:12:34 +0200
> Some update suggestions were taken into account
> from static source code analysis.
> Markus Elfring (6):
> Replace seven seq_printf() calls by seq_putc()
> Replace 17 seq_printf() calls by seq_puts()
Why does anyone care whether printf or putc/puts is used? Really it
doesn't matter *at* *all*.
I don't object to the patch but if it would up to me I probably wouldn't
bother applying it it either.
Sometimes I just want to "print" something and I don't want to care
whether it is a constant string or a single-byte constant string, or
something more general.
I see these changes as worse than white-space fixes.
> Adjust four function calls together with a variable assignment
> Use seq_puts() in faulty_status()
> Adjust six function calls together with a variable assignment in faulty_status()
> Add some spaces for better code readability
> drivers/md/faulty.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> drivers/md/md.c | 66 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
> 2 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)
Description: PGP signature