Re: [PATCH v5] printk: Userspace format enumeration support

[Chris Down]

Petr Mladek writes:
> > I don't feel strongly that this is more clear though, so maybe you
> > mean something else?
>
> I was pretty tired when reviewing the patch. It was not easy for me
> to create the mental model of the code. I felt that some other names
> would have made it easier.
>
> Also the tricky pi_next() implementation did not help much. It looks
> like you changed the code many times to get it working and did not
> clean it at the end.

No worries. I'm not totally clear on what you're asking for though: do you 
meant that you'd like the SEQ_START_TOKEN logic to only be present for 
pi_start, or to pull out the logic currently in pi_next into another function 
and call it from both, or?

In my mind, pi_start is really just a special case of pi_next, so the code flow 
makes sense to me. I'm happy to change it to whatever you like, but it's not 
immediately obvious to me what that is :-)