[PATCH] block: partitions: Use seq_buf_putc() in cmdline_partition()

[PATCH] block: partitions: Use seq_buf_putc() in cmdline_partition()

[Markus Elfring]

From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:50:33 +0200

A single line break should be put into a sequence buffer.
Thus use the corresponding function “seq_buf_putc”.

The source code was transformed by using the Coccinelle software.

Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
---

All affected source code places could be adjusted at once
if the change acceptance would evolve accordingly.

18 source files are left over for similar development considerations.


 block/partitions/cmdline.c | 4 +---
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/block/partitions/cmdline.c b/block/partitions/cmdline.c
index 4fd52ed154b4..ce7488b3d2db 100644
--- a/block/partitions/cmdline.c
+++ b/block/partitions/cmdline.c
@@ -376,8 +376,6 @@ int cmdline_partition(struct parsed_partitions *state)
 
 	cmdline_parts_set(parts, disk_size, state);
 	cmdline_parts_verifier(1, state);
-
-	seq_buf_puts(&state->pp_buf, "\n");
-
+	seq_buf_putc(&state->pp_buf, '\n');
 	return 1;
 }
-- 
2.54.0

Re: [PATCH] block: partitions: Use seq_buf_putc() in cmdline_partition()

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 10:08:01AM +0200, Markus Elfring wrote:
> 
> A single line break should be put into a sequence buffer.
> Thus use the corresponding function “seq_buf_putc”.

“seq_buf_putc()”.

> The source code was transformed by using the Coccinelle software.

...

>  	cmdline_parts_set(parts, disk_size, state);
>  	cmdline_parts_verifier(1, state);

> -
> -	seq_buf_puts(&state->pp_buf, "\n");
> -
> +	seq_buf_putc(&state->pp_buf, '\n');

Why did you remove blank lines?

>  	return 1;

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: [PATCH] block: partitions: Use seq_buf_putc() in cmdline_partition()

[Markus Elfring]

> 
>>  	cmdline_parts_set(parts, disk_size, state);
>>  	cmdline_parts_verifier(1, state);
> 
>> -
>> -	seq_buf_puts(&state->pp_buf, "\n");
>> -
>> +	seq_buf_putc(&state->pp_buf, '\n');
> 
> Why did you remove blank lines?
> 
>>  	return 1;
I imagine that this source code place can become a bit more succinct.

See also:
efi_partition()
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v7.1.1/source/block/partitions/efi.c#L694-L756

Do you insist to preserve two blank lines here?

Regards,
Markus

Re: [PATCH] block: partitions: Use seq_buf_putc() in cmdline_partition()

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 02:18:49PM +0200, Markus Elfring wrote:

...

> >>  	cmdline_parts_set(parts, disk_size, state);
> >>  	cmdline_parts_verifier(1, state);
> > 
> >> -
> >> -	seq_buf_puts(&state->pp_buf, "\n");
> >> -
> >> +	seq_buf_putc(&state->pp_buf, '\n');
> > 
> > Why did you remove blank lines?
> > 
> >>  	return 1;
> I imagine that this source code place can become a bit more succinct.
> 
> See also:
> efi_partition()
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v7.1.1/source/block/partitions/efi.c#L694-L756
> 
> Do you insist to preserve two blank lines here?

Yes.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: block: partitions: Use seq_buf_putc() in cmdline_partition()

[Markus Elfring]

> All affected source code places could be adjusted at once
> if the change acceptance would evolve accordingly.
> 
> 18 source files are left over for similar development considerations.
> 
> 
>  block/partitions/cmdline.c | 4 +---

Will development interests grow for remaining update candidates?

See also:
Clarification approach “Using seq_buf_putc() calls more often?”
https://lore.kernel.org/cocci/3455eaa7-297f-46c9-a8ab-91e5bfbe0105@web.de/
https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/cocci/2026-06/msg00030.html

Regards,
Markus

Re: block: partitions: Use seq_buf_putc() in cmdline_partition()

[Christophe JAILLET]

Le 26/06/2026 à 18:48, Markus Elfring a écrit :
>> All affected source code places could be adjusted at once
>> if the change acceptance would evolve accordingly.
>>
>> 18 source files are left over for similar development considerations.
>>
>>
>>   block/partitions/cmdline.c | 4 +---
> 
> Will development interests grow for remaining update candidates?

These changes are pointless and already performed by the compiler. See [1].
So from my PoV, they only trash git blame output and make future 
backport harder.

Just my 2c.

CJ


[1]: 
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v7.1-rc6/source/include/linux/seq_file.h#L127

> 
> See also:
> Clarification approach “Using seq_buf_putc() calls more often?”
> https://lore.kernel.org/cocci/3455eaa7-297f-46c9-a8ab-91e5bfbe0105@web.de/
> https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/cocci/2026-06/msg00030.html
> 
> Regards,
> Markus
> 
> 

Re: block: partitions: Use seq_buf_putc() in cmdline_partition()

[Markus Elfring]

…
>>>   block/partitions/cmdline.c | 4 +---
>>
>> Will development interests grow for remaining update candidates?
> 
> These changes are pointless and already performed by the compiler.

I got other impressions.


>                                                                    See [1].
> So from my PoV, they only trash git blame output and make future backport harder.
> 
> Just my 2c.
…
> [1]: https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v7.1-rc6/source/include/linux/seq_file.h#L127

Why do you refer to the sequence file programming interface
when I propose refinements for the application of sequence buffers?
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v7.1.1/source/include/linux/seq_buf.h#L176-L177

Regards,
Markus