Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] string: Consolidate yesno() helpers under string.h hood

From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Cc: "Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
	"Sakari Ailus" <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>,
	"Rasmus Villemoes" <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
	"Sergey Senozhatsky" <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
	"Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	"Andy Shevchenko" <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
	"Alex Deucher" <alexander.deucher@amd.com>,
	"Mikita Lipski" <mikita.lipski@amd.com>,
	"Eryk Brol" <eryk.brol@amd.com>,
	"Chris Wilson" <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"Rahul Lakkireddy" <rahul.lakkireddy@chelsio.com>,
	"Francis Laniel" <laniel_francis@privacyrequired.com>,
	amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
	dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	intel-gfx <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Harry Wentland" <harry.wentland@amd.com>,
	"Leo Li" <sunpeng.li@amd.com>, "David Airlie" <airlied@linux.ie>,
	"Daniel Vetter" <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
	"Jani Nikula" <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
	"Joonas Lahtinen" <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>,
	"Rodrigo Vivi" <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
	"Raju Rangoju" <rajur@chelsio.com>,
	"Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] string: Consolidate yesno() helpers under string.h hood
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2021 13:45:58 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YC0QBvv9HXr64ySf@alley> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHp75VfVXnqdVRAPQ36vZeD-ZMCjWmjA_-6T=jnOEVMne4bv0g@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon 2021-02-15 16:39:26, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> +Cc: Sakari and printk people
> 
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 4:28 PM Christian König
> <christian.koenig@amd.com> wrote:
> > Am 15.02.21 um 15:21 schrieb Andy Shevchenko:
> > > We have already few similar implementation and a lot of code that can benefit
> > > of the yesno() helper.  Consolidate yesno() helpers under string.h hood.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> >
> > Looks like a good idea to me, feel free to add an Acked-by: Christian
> > König <christian.koenig@amd.com> to the series.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> > But looking at the use cases for this, wouldn't it make more sense to
> > teach kprintf some new format modifier for this?
> 
> As a next step? IIRC Sakari has at some point the series converted
> yesno and Co. to something which I don't remember the details of.
> 
> Guys, what do you think?

Honestly, I think that yesno() is much easier to understand than %py.
And %py[DOY] looks really scary. It has been suggested at
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/YCqaNnr7ynRydczE@smile.fi.intel.com/#t

Yes, enabledisable() is hard to parse but it is still self-explaining
and can be found easily by cscope. On the contrary, %pyD will likely
print some python code and it is not clear if it would be compatible
with v3. I am just kidding but you get the picture.

Best Regards,
Petr