Re: [PATCH] skbuff: create skb_panic() to let caller specify panic

[Jean Sacren <sakiwit@gmail.com>]

From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2013 21:11:01 -0800
>
> On Sat, 2013-02-09 at 21:49 -0700, Jean Sacren wrote:
> > Combine skb_over_panic() and skb_under_panic() into skb_panic() and let
> > the caller specify whether it is skb_over_panic or skb_under_panic.
> []
> > diff --git a/net/core/skbuff.c b/net/core/skbuff.c
> []
> > @@ -104,48 +104,28 @@ static const struct pipe_buf_operations sock_pipe_buf_ops = {
> []
> > -static void skb_over_panic(struct sk_buff *skb, int sz, void *here)
> > +static void skb_panic(struct sk_buff *skb, unsigned int size, void *addr,
> > +		      const char panic[])
> >  {
> > -	pr_emerg("%s: text:%p len:%d put:%d head:%p data:%p tail:%#lx end:%#lx dev:%s\n",
> > -		 __func__, here, skb->len, sz, skb->head, skb->data,
> > +	pr_emerg("%s: text:%p len:%d put:%d head:%p data:%p tail:%#lx "
> > +		 "end:%#lx dev:%s\n",
> 
> Trivia:
> 
> Don't split the format across multiple lines please.

Thank you for reviewing.

Honestly I didn't want to split the whole string, but I was in the
dilemma of accommodating 80-column convention. I'm ready to respin if
the consensus favors one long string. But how long is too long?

-- 
Jean Sacren