Re: [RFC][PATCH 05/12 v3] tracing: Convert seq_buf fields to be like seq_file fields

[Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>]

On Wed, 5 Nov 2014 16:57:11 +0100
Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.cz> wrote:

> On Tue 2014-11-04 10:52:42, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > From: "Steven Rostedt (Red Hat)" <rostedt@goodmis.org>
> > 
> > In facilitating the conversion of seq_file to use seq_buf,
> > have the seq_buf fields match the types used by seq_file.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
> > ---
> >  include/linux/seq_buf.h | 8 ++++----
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/linux/seq_buf.h b/include/linux/seq_buf.h
> > index 6d1c57d6073f..a4d114e6f740 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/seq_buf.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/seq_buf.h
> > @@ -19,10 +19,10 @@
> >   * @overflow:	Set if more bytes should have been written to buffer
> >   */
> >  struct seq_buf {
> > -	unsigned char		*buffer;
> > -	unsigned int		size;
> > -	unsigned int		len;
> > -	unsigned int		readpos;
> > +	char			*buffer;
> 
> It would make sense to use "char" from the beginning. In fact, it is
> already used on many locations in seq_buf.c. Or we might want to get
> rid of "unsigned char" in seq_buf.c here as well.

I could, but I'm being lazy ;-) No reason to change the patch series for
something as small as this. It doesn't break bisect.

> 
> > +	size_t			size;
> > +	size_t			len;
> > +	loff_t			readpos;
> 
> I have just noticed that the variable is called "read_pos" in
> seq_file. Are you going to sync the name later?

Yeah, I purposely kept them different to find the two when needed.

> 
> Also I am a bit curious that "readpos" use another type than "len"
> and "size". Well, this is not in the scope of this patchset. I am fine
> with keeping "loff_t" at this point.

Again, seq_file has been around for a long time with these types. But
as you said, it's out of scope for this patch series. I'm just trying
to keep with what's been the norm here.

-- Steve