On 7/19/22 19:15, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jun 2022 20:41:59 -0400
Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Core idea: Wouldn't it be nice if we had a common data structure and calling
convention for outputting strings?
Because seq_buf gives us this already, the cover letter really just needs
to state exactly what the benefit is to replace seq_buf with printbuf (and
why seq_buf can not be simply extended to do some extra features).
- seq_buf has the wrong semantics on overflow for what vsnprintf needs.
- seq_buf is somewhat unnecessarily coupled to tracing needs - the
readpos member has nothing to do with outputting formatting strings, and
some of the pretty-printers are tracing specific and don't really belong
in a generic pretty-printing library.
And, when I tried to talk to you about changing seq_buf to be more
suitable you didn't respond - you just dropped off the IRC discussion we
were having.
I just applied your series and ran the tracing selftests and several of
them failed.
# cd tools/testing/selftests/ftrace/
# ./ftracetest
Thank you for telling me where to find the tests. It would've saved us
some back and forth (and I could've gotten on this sooner) if you'd
responded when I asked before.
It may seem like the perfectly natural place to look to you - who works
on the code - but to someone who works on a variety of subsystems, each
of which puts their test code (if they have any!) in a different place,
it wasn't.
However, when I enabled all the tracing kernel config options, your
tests are now failing to run at all with:
db_root: cannot open: /etc/target
So now I've got to debug your tests, too. Gah.
