Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/3] lib/string_helpers: Add a few string helpers

Lucas De Marchi
2022-01-19T20:53:48Z

On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 05:15:02PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 04:16:12PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> On Wed, 19 Jan 2022, Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> wrote:
>> > On Tue 2022-01-18 23:24:47, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
>> >> Add some helpers under lib/string_helpers.h so they can be used
>> >> throughout the kernel. When I started doing this there were 2 other
>> >> previous attempts I know of, not counting the iterations each of them
>> >> had:
>> >>
>> >> 1) https://lore.kernel.org/all/20191023131308.9420-1-jani.nikula@intel.com/
>> >> 2) https://lore.kernel.org/all/20210215142137.64476-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com/#t
>> >>
>> >> Going through the comments I tried to find some common ground and
>> >> justification for what is in here, addressing some of the concerns
>> >> raised.
>> >>
>> >> d. This doesn't bring onoff() helper as there are some places in the
>> >> kernel with onoff as variable - another name is probably needed for
>> >> this function in order not to shadow the variable, or those variables
>> >> could be renamed. Or if people wanting <someprefix>
>> >> try to find a short one
>> >
>> > I would call it str_on_off().
>> >
>> > And I would actually suggest to use the same style also for
>> > the other helpers.
>> >
>> > The "str_" prefix would make it clear that it is something with
>> > string. There are other <prefix>_on_off() that affect some
>> > functionality, e.g. mute_led_on_off(), e1000_vlan_filter_on_off().
>> >
>> > The dash '_' would significantly help to parse the name. yesno() and
>> > onoff() are nicely short and kind of acceptable. But "enabledisable()"
>> > is a puzzle.
>> >
>> > IMHO, str_yes_no(), str_on_off(), str_enable_disable() are a good
>> > compromise.
>> >
>> > The main motivation should be code readability. You write the
>> > code once. But many people will read it many times. Open coding
>> > is sometimes better than misleading macro names.
>> >
>> > That said, I do not want to block this patchset. If others like
>> > it... ;-)
>>
>> I don't mind the names either way. Adding the prefix and dashes is
>> helpful in that it's possible to add the functions first and convert
>> users at leisure, though with a bunch of churn, while using names that
>> collide with existing ones requires the changes to happen in one go.
>>
>> What I do mind is grinding this series to a halt once again. I sent a
>> handful of versions of this three years ago, with inconclusive
>> bikeshedding back and forth, eventually threw my hands up in disgust,
>> and walked away.
>
>Yeah we can sed this anytime later we want to, but we need to get the foot
>in the door. There's also a pile more of these all over.
>
>Acked-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
>
>on the series, maybe it helps? And yes let's merge this through drm-misc.

Ok, it seems we are reaching some agreement here then:

- Change it to use str_ prefix
- Wait -rc1 to avoid conflict
- Merge through drm-misc

I will re-send the series again soon.

Lucas De Marchi