Re: [lm-sensors] [PATCH v2 2/2] libsensors: Use __func__

* Re: [lm-sensors] [PATCH v2 2/2] libsensors: Use __func__
@ 2009-02-23 11:06 Andre Prendel
  2009-02-23 11:27 ` Andre Prendel
  2009-03-02 13:10 ` Andre Prendel
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Andre Prendel @ 2009-02-23 11:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: lm-sensors

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

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread