All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: kaber@trash.net, bruno@thinktube.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	jgarzik@pobox.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
	linville@tuxdriver.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/8021q/vlan_dev.c - Use print_mac
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:03:32 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1203383012.7181.102.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080218.165036.218650084.davem@davemloft.net>

On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 16:50 -0800, David Miller wrote:
> Actually it seems the 'pure' attribute is more important
> here.  Although it's not semantically a perfect match,
> what we need to tell the compiler is basically that:
> 
> 1) the return value depends upon the inputs
> 2) if the input is not used, it's safe to avoid the call
> 
> and 'pure' accomplishes that without any unwanted side-effects.
> 
> I think this will not result in any unwanted over-optimization.
> Because if the inputs change in any way GCC has to emit the
> call.
> 
> Any objections?

Does this need to be done for all function calls
declared with __attribute__((format(printf, x, y)))
{
return 0;
}

ie: pr_debug, dev_dbg, dev_vdbg?

Perhaps it's more sensible to go back to

#ifdef DEBUG
#define pr_debug(fmt, arg...) do {} while (0)
#endif

and give up the printf argument verification


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Joe Perches <joe-6d6DIl74uiNBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>
To: David Miller <davem-fT/PcQaiUtIeIZ0/mPfg9Q@public.gmane.org>
Cc: kaber-dcUjhNyLwpNeoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org,
	bruno-L9ZBdB2wSWtl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org,
	netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	jgarzik-e+AXbWqSrlAAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org,
	linux-wireless-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	linville-2XuSBdqkA4R54TAoqtyWWQ@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/8021q/vlan_dev.c - Use print_mac
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:03:32 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1203383012.7181.102.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080218.165036.218650084.davem-fT/PcQaiUtIeIZ0/mPfg9Q@public.gmane.org>

On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 16:50 -0800, David Miller wrote:
> Actually it seems the 'pure' attribute is more important
> here.  Although it's not semantically a perfect match,
> what we need to tell the compiler is basically that:
> 
> 1) the return value depends upon the inputs
> 2) if the input is not used, it's safe to avoid the call
> 
> and 'pure' accomplishes that without any unwanted side-effects.
> 
> I think this will not result in any unwanted over-optimization.
> Because if the inputs change in any way GCC has to emit the
> call.
> 
> Any objections?

Does this need to be done for all function calls
declared with __attribute__((format(printf, x, y)))
{
return 0;
}

ie: pr_debug, dev_dbg, dev_vdbg?

Perhaps it's more sensible to go back to

#ifdef DEBUG
#define pr_debug(fmt, arg...) do {} while (0)
#endif

and give up the printf argument verification

  reply	other threads:[~2008-02-19  1:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-02-15 10:48 [PATCH] add macro for printing mac addresses Bruno Randolf
2008-02-15 10:48 ` Bruno Randolf
2008-02-15 10:58 ` David Miller
2008-02-15 17:42   ` [PATCH] net/8021q/vlan_dev.c - Use print_mac Joe Perches
2008-02-15 17:42     ` Joe Perches
2008-02-18  7:35     ` David Miller
2008-02-18 15:19     ` Patrick McHardy
2008-02-18 18:31       ` Joe Perches
2008-02-18 18:31         ` Joe Perches
2008-02-18 21:31         ` Patrick McHardy
2008-02-18 21:31           ` Patrick McHardy
2008-02-18 20:55       ` David Miller
2008-02-18 21:17         ` Patrick McHardy
2008-02-18 21:17           ` Patrick McHardy
2008-02-19  0:43           ` David Miller
2008-02-19  0:43             ` David Miller
2008-02-19  0:50             ` David Miller
2008-02-19  0:50               ` David Miller
2008-02-19  1:03               ` Joe Perches [this message]
2008-02-19  1:03                 ` Joe Perches
2008-02-19  1:30                 ` Philip Craig
2008-02-19  1:30                   ` Philip Craig
2008-02-19  3:23                 ` David Miller
2008-02-19  3:23                   ` David Miller
2008-02-19 11:48               ` Patrick McHardy
2008-02-15 17:42   ` [PATCH 2/2] Remove MAC_FMT Joe Perches
2008-02-15 17:42     ` Joe Perches
2008-02-18  7:35     ` David Miller
2008-02-15 12:54 ` [PATCH] add macro for printing mac addresses Johannes Berg
2008-02-15 12:54   ` Johannes Berg

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1203383012.7181.102.camel@localhost \
    --to=joe@perches.com \
    --cc=bruno@thinktube.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
    --cc=kaber@trash.net \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.