Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] lib/vsprintf: Split out sprintf() and friends

[Steven Rostedt]

On Mon, 7 Aug 2023 18:09:54 +0300
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 05:03:19PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > On Sat 2023-08-05 20:50:26, Andy Shevchenko wrote:  
> > > kernel.h is being used as a dump for all kinds of stuff for a long time.
> > > sprintf() and friends are used in many drivers without need of the full
> > > kernel.h dependency train with it.
> > > 
> > > Here is the attempt on cleaning it up by splitting out sprintf() and
> > > friends.  
> 
> ...
> 
> > I agree that kernel.h is not the right place. But are there any
> > numbers how much separate sprintf.h might safe?
> > Maybe, we should not reinvent the wheel and get inspired by
> > userspace.
> > 
> > sprintf() and friends are basic functions which most people know
> > from userspace. And it is pretty handy that the kernel variants
> > are are mostly compatible as well.
> > 
> > IMHO, it might be handful when they are also included similar way
> > as in userspace. From my POV printk.h is like stdio.h. And we already
> > have include/linux/stdarg.h where the v*print*() function might
> > fit nicely.
> > 
> > How does this sound, please?  
> 
> Not every user (especially _header_) wants to have printk.h included just for
> sprintf.h that may have nothing to do with real output. So, same reasoning
> from me as keeping that in kernel.h, i.e. printk.h no better.
> 

If you separate out the sprintf() into its own header and still include
that in kernel.h, then for what you said in the other email:

> What to do with _headers_ that include kernel.h for no reason other than
> sprintf.h (as an example)? Your suggestion, please?

It can include sprintf.h (or printk.h or stdio.h, whatever) instead of kernel.h.

What's the issue?

-- Steve