On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 11:37:57AM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi Andre,
>
> On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 09:44:03 +0100, Andre Prendel wrote:
> > Hi Jean,
> >
> > this is an updated version of the patch from 20.02. According to your
> > hint I have patched conf-parse.y and not conf-parse.c.
> >
> > This patch unifies sensors_fatal_error() calls. Uses __func__ to get
> > the function name.
> >
> > Andre
> >
> > ---
> > access.c | 3 +--
> > conf-parse.y | 3 +--
> > data.c | 2 +-
> > general.c | 7 +++----
> > 4 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff -urp lm-sensors-dev/lib/access.c my-sensors/lib/access.c
> > --- lm-sensors-dev/lib/access.c 2009-02-19 23:17:15.000000000 +0100
> > +++ my-sensors/lib/access.c 2009-02-22 17:57:28.000000000 +0100
> > @@ -201,8 +201,7 @@ char *sensors_get_label(const sensors_ch
> >
> > sensors_get_label_exit:
> > if (!label)
> > - sensors_fatal_error("sensors_get_label",
> > - "Allocating label text");
> > + sensors_fatal_error(__func__, "Allocating label text");
> > return label;
> > }
> >
> > diff -urp lm-sensors-dev/lib/conf-parse.y my-sensors/lib/conf-parse.y
> > --- lm-sensors-dev/lib/conf-parse.y 2009-02-16 14:12:50.000000000 +0100
> > +++ my-sensors/lib/conf-parse.y 2009-02-22 18:02:42.000000000 +0100
> > @@ -342,7 +342,6 @@ sensors_expr *malloc_expr(void)
> > {
> > sensors_expr *res = malloc(sizeof(sensors_expr));
> > if (! res)
> > - sensors_fatal_error("malloc_expr","Allocating a new expression");
> > + sensors_fatal_error(__func__, "Allocating a new expression");
> > return res;
> > }
> > -
> > diff -urp lm-sensors-dev/lib/data.c my-sensors/lib/data.c
> > --- lm-sensors-dev/lib/data.c 2009-02-19 23:17:15.000000000 +0100
> > +++ my-sensors/lib/data.c 2009-02-22 17:57:28.000000000 +0100
> > @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ int sensors_parse_chip_name(const char *
> > return -SENSORS_ERR_CHIP_NAME;
> > res->prefix = strndup(name, dash - name);
> > if (!res->prefix)
> > - sensors_fatal_error("sensors_parse_chip_name",
> > + sensors_fatal_error(__func__,
> > "Allocating name prefix");
> > name = dash + 1;
> > }
> > diff -urp lm-sensors-dev/lib/general.c my-sensors/lib/general.c
> > --- lm-sensors-dev/lib/general.c 2009-02-19 23:17:15.000000000 +0100
> > +++ my-sensors/lib/general.c 2009-02-22 17:57:28.000000000 +0100
> > @@ -34,8 +34,7 @@ void sensors_malloc_array(void *list, in
> >
> > *my_list = malloc(el_size*A_BUNCH);
> > if (! *my_list)
> > - sensors_fatal_error("sensors_malloc_array",
> > - "Allocating new elements");
> > + sensors_fatal_error(__func__, "Allocating new elements");
> > *max_el = A_BUNCH;
> > *num_el = 0;
> > }
> > @@ -59,7 +58,7 @@ void sensors_add_array_el(const void *el
> > new_max_el = *max_el + A_BUNCH;
> > *my_list = realloc(*my_list, new_max_el * el_size);
> > if (! *my_list)
> > - sensors_fatal_error("sensors_add_array_el",
> > + sensors_fatal_error(__func__,
> > "Allocating new elements");
> > *max_el = new_max_el;
> > }
> > @@ -77,7 +76,7 @@ void sensors_add_array_els(const void *e
> > new_max_el -= new_max_el % A_BUNCH;
> > *my_list = realloc(*my_list, new_max_el * el_size);
> > if (! *my_list)
> > - sensors_fatal_error("sensors_add_array_els",
> > + sensors_fatal_error(__func__,
> > "Allocating new elements");
> > *max_el = new_max_el;
> > }
>
> Patch looks good, however I can't apply it right now because SVN is
> frozen for the release of lm-sensors 3.1.0 at the end of the week. Your
> patch will be applied after the release.
Allright, thanks.
>
> BTW, are you sure you don't want an SVN account? You're sending good
> patches, and you might as well apply them yourself...
How works patch reviewing in that case? Should I send the patches
still to the list? I don't want to break something or do silly
things.
So if we don't lose the reviewing I would be very happy to get an account.
Thanks
Andre
> --
> Jean Delvare
