Re: [PATCH] block: Remove leading whitespace and trailing newline in elevator switch error message

[Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>]

> On May 8, 2017, at 8:18 PM, Elliott, Robert (Persistent Memory) <elliott@h=
pe.com> wrote:
>=20
>=20
>=20
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: linux-block-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-block-
>> owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of markus@trippelsdorf.de
>> Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2017 12:23 AM
>> To: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@sandisk.com>
>> Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org; axboe@kernel.dk
>> Subject: [PATCH] block: Remove leading whitespace and trailing
>> newline in elevator switch error message
>>=20
>>=20
>> Trying to switch to a non-existing elevator currently results in
>> garbled
>> dmesg output, e.g.:
>>=20
>> # echo "  foo" > /sys/block/sda/queue/scheduler
>>=20
>> elevator: type   foo not found
>> elevator: switch to   foo
>> failed
> ...
>> @@ -1063,15 +1062,14 @@ static int __elevator_change(struct
>> request_queue *q, const char *name)
>>    if (q->mq_ops && !strncmp(name, "none", 4))
>>        return elevator_switch(q, NULL);
>>=20
>> -    strlcpy(elevator_name, name, sizeof(elevator_name));
>> -    e =3D elevator_get(strstrip(elevator_name), true);
>> +    e =3D elevator_get(name, true);
>>    if (!e) {
>> -        printk(KERN_ERR "elevator: type %s not found\n",
>> elevator_name);
>> +        printk(KERN_ERR "elevator: type %s not found\n", name);
>>        return -EINVAL;
>>    }
> ...
>> @@ -1112,16 +1110,19 @@ static inline bool elv_support_iosched(struct
>> request_queue *q)
>> ssize_t elv_iosched_store(struct request_queue *q, const char *name,
>>              size_t count)
>> {
> ...
>> +    strlcpy(elevator_name, skip_spaces(name),
>> sizeof(elevator_name));
>> +    strstrip(elevator_name);
>> +    ret =3D __elevator_change(q, elevator_name);
>>    if (!ret)
>>        return count;
>>=20
>> -    printk(KERN_ERR "elevator: switch to %s failed\n", name);
>> +    printk(KERN_ERR "elevator: switch to %s failed\n",
>> elevator_name);
>>    return ret;
>> }
>=20
> That leaves two lines of error prints for a single error, and
> the second line doesn't convey additional information.

Yeah good point. Honestly I think we should just kill both lines. None of th=
em add value.=20