Re: [PATCH net-next 2/7] netconsole: refactor CPU number formatting into separate function

[Simon Horman]

On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 05:52:07AM -0800, Breno Leitao wrote:
> Extract CPU number formatting logic from prepare_extradata() into a new
> append_cpu_nr() function.
> 
> This refactoring improves code organization by isolating CPU number
> formatting into its own function while reducing the complexity of
> prepare_extradata().
> 
> The change prepares the codebase for the upcoming taskname feature by
> establishing a consistent pattern for handling sysdata features.
> 
> The CPU number formatting logic itself remains unchanged; only its
> location has moved to improve maintainability.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Breno Leitao <leitao@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/net/netconsole.c | 18 +++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/netconsole.c b/drivers/net/netconsole.c
> index c086e2fe51f874812379e6f89c421d7d32980f91..26ff2ed4de16bce58e9eeaf8b5b362dfaafaca0a 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/netconsole.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/netconsole.c
> @@ -1117,13 +1117,21 @@ static void populate_configfs_item(struct netconsole_target *nt,
>  	init_target_config_group(nt, target_name);
>  }
>  
> +static int append_cpu_nr(struct netconsole_target *nt, int offset)
> +{
> +	/* Append cpu=%d at extradata_complete after userdata str */
> +	return scnprintf(&nt->extradata_complete[offset],
> +			 MAX_EXTRADATA_ENTRY_LEN, " cpu=%u\n",
> +			 raw_smp_processor_id());
> +}
> +
>  /*
>   * prepare_extradata - append sysdata at extradata_complete in runtime
>   * @nt: target to send message to
>   */
>  static int prepare_extradata(struct netconsole_target *nt)
>  {
> -	int sysdata_len, extradata_len;
> +	int extradata_len;
>  
>  	/* userdata was appended when configfs write helper was called
>  	 * by update_userdata().
> @@ -1133,12 +1141,8 @@ static int prepare_extradata(struct netconsole_target *nt)
>  	if (!(nt->sysdata_fields & SYSDATA_CPU_NR))
>  		goto out;
>  
> -	/* Append cpu=%d at extradata_complete after userdata str */
> -	sysdata_len = scnprintf(&nt->extradata_complete[nt->userdata_length],
> -				MAX_EXTRADATA_ENTRY_LEN, " cpu=%u\n",
> -				raw_smp_processor_id());
> -
> -	extradata_len += sysdata_len;
> +	if (nt->sysdata_fields & SYSDATA_CPU_NR)
> +		extradata_len += append_cpu_nr(nt, nt->userdata_length);

Hi Breno,

As this is the only caller of append_cpu_nr() I'm wondering
if it would be nicer if nt was the only argument to append_cpu_nr().

Not a big deal either way, so the above notwithstanding:

Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxx>

>  
>  	WARN_ON_ONCE(extradata_len >
>  		     MAX_EXTRADATA_ENTRY_LEN * MAX_EXTRADATA_ITEMS);
> 
> -- 
> 2.43.5
> 
>