On Wed, 2018-12-19 at 16:01 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 14:38:39 -0600
> Tom Zanussi <zanussi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2018-12-19 at 15:30 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 12:20:19 -0800
> > > Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Yeah, I had considered it but wasn't sure it was worth it. Since
> > > > > you're suggesting it is, I can send another patch on top of
> > > > > these, or
> > > > > feel free if you want to too. ;-)
> > > >
> > > > I believe the 'strlen("foo") -> sizeof("foo") - 1'
> > > > conversions do not change objects at all.
> > > >
> > > > strlen("constant") is already optimized by gcc to a
> > > > constant value when fed a constant string.
> > >
> > > If that's the case (and it probably is), then yeah, strlen is
> > > probably
> > > better. As it can handle the "not a constant" that you stated in
> > > another email.
> > >
> >
> > OK, so I guess that means we should just drop this patch ('[PATCH 2/7]
> > tracing: Change strlen to sizeof for hist trigger static strings').
> >
>
> No, that patch is fine, the macro was not. I've already applied your
> patch set. Just need to run it through my tests.
The patch included:
- start += strlen("char[");
+ start += sizeof("char[") - 1;
So, that 2/7 patch is unnecessary as there is no object code
change and using 'sizeof("const") - 1' is less intelligible
than strlen("const")
If you convert the strncmp(ptr, "const", strlen("const"))
uses to strncmp_prefix(ptr, "const") eventually, the patch
just makes more variations to change.
