On Thu, 2016-08-18 at 16:58 +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Thu 18-08-16 07:46:03, Joe Perches wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2016-08-18 at 16:41 +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > > On Thu 18-08-16 16:26:16, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > > > > b) doesn't it try to be overly clever when doing that in the caller > > > > doesn't cost all that much? Sure you can save few bytes in the spaces > > > > but then I would just argue to use \t rather than fixed string length. > > > ohh, I misread the code. It tries to emulate the width formater. But is > > > this really necessary? Do we know about any tools doing a fixed string > > > parsing? > > I don't, but it's proc and all the output formatting > > shouldn't be changed. > > > > Appended to is generally OK, but whitespace changed is > > not good. > OK fair enough, I will > - seq_write(m, s, 16); > + seq_puts(m, s); > > because smaps needs more than 16 chars and export it in > fs/proc/internal.h > > will retest and repost. The shift in the meminfo case uses PAGE_SHIFT too. I suggest you make a local static instead and for that one 17 byte line do seq_printf(m, "Private_Hugetlb: %7lu kB\n", mss.private_hugetlb >> 10); Another possible thing is to speed up all seq_puts uses with fixed chars strings by avoiding the runtime strlen and use the compiler known string length: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/11/607 -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>