Re: [patch 3/3] x86: io-apic - code style cleaning for setup_IO_APIC_irqs

[Maciej W. Rozycki]

On Sat, 6 Sep 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> >  Honestly, this one should probably use sprintf() or suchlike to avoid the
> > mess of printk() calls building a line of output from pieces.  It's quite
> > easy to calculate here what the maximum size of the buffer required could
> > be and automatic arrays can have variable size, so no need for the hassle
> > of heap management.  Calls to printk() without a trailing newline should
> > be avoided where possible as it messes up logging priority if a message
> > pops up from an interrupt inbetween.
> 
> hm, is it worth the trouble? This is during very early init.

 But is it really a trouble?  With an auto array the additional code is
minuscule -- mostly printk() calls replaced with sprintf() plus a variable
or two to maintain a pointer to the buffer which will go into registers
anyway.  Plus a pr_info("%s", buffer) or suchlike at the end.  I know 
laziness is a virtue, but you have to draw a line somewhere. ;)

 The benefit, apart from what I wrote above, is less chance of propagating
bad style to newcomers with each piece of such old code removed.

  Maciej
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/