On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 08:56:30AM -0800, James Bottomley wrote:
> > + wq = alloc_ordered_workqueue("%s_%d_hpsa", 0, name, h->ctlr);
>
> It's not an objection to your patch, but what idiot did this? There's
> an extra variable there between the format and the arguments. That
> makes the pattern counterintuitive (i.e. an interface easy to get wrong)
> because everywhere else, the arguments immediately follow the format
> argument. Please never, ever do this again.
>
> By the way, the above is rhetorical ... the culprit is in the cc.
LOL, that idiot would be me. Well, it has a history. Those functions
originally only took static names and only way later got augmented to
take printf format and, at that point, only few needed formatting. I
can argue both sides of changing the parameter order. It's one of the
easiest mistakes to spot after all.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
