On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 10:26:56AM +0300, Arseny Maslennikov wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 04:47:27PM +0100, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > On Mon, 3 Sep 2018 19:13:16 +0300
> > Arseny Maslennikov <ar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > + if (ndev->dev_id == ndev->dev_port) {
> > > + netdev_info_once(ndev,
> > > + "\"%s\" wants to know my dev_id. "
> > > + "Should it look at dev_port instead?\n",
> > > + current->comm);
> > > + netdev_info_once(ndev,
> > > + "See Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-class-net for more info.\n");
> > > + }
> >
> > Single line message is sufficient.
> > Also don't break strings in messages.
> >
>
> OK, will fix in v4.
>
>
> (Sorry if the following is too off-topic here)
> Multi-line messages in separate printk calls can be racy, I get that.
> But I'd like to hear some reasoning behind the style decision to not
> break a long string into many string literals. (I'll most certainly not
> be alone in this, Documentation/process/ does not mention reasons, only
> the requirements themselves)
>
> The only drawback I currently see is that breaking a long message into
> multiple string literals makes it impossible to git grep the kernel tree
> for the whole message text.
> However, splitting a long line this way allows us to nicely wrap the
> code at 80 columns, which is a readability boon.
>
> Are there any other reasons to avoid that? Except maybe matters of taste. :)
AFAIK "grep" is the reason.
>
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + ret = sprintf(buf, "%#x\n", ndev->dev_id);
> > > +
> > > + return ret;
> >
> > Why not?
> > return sprintf...
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
