From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Lord Subject: Re: [PATCHSET] printk: implement printk_header() and merging printk, take #3 Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2008 09:13:49 -0500 Message-ID: <47B6EF9D.5090804@rtr.ca> References: <12028937731333-git-send-email-htejun@gmail.com> <20080213155701.48871761.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <47B38E13.1060503@gmail.com> <20080213170950.86945835.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <47B398B3.40308@gmail.com> <47B4EFAB.2040102@gmail.com> <20080214182700.a9a706e9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <47B4FA9C.9080809@gmail.com> <20080214185003.9ca9a640.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <47B50420.3060403@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from rtr.ca ([76.10.145.34]:3486 "EHLO mail.rtr.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754544AbYBPONw (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Feb 2008 09:13:52 -0500 In-Reply-To: <47B50420.3060403@gmail.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Tejun Heo Cc: Andrew Morton , jeff@garzik.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, jengelh@computergmbh.de, matthew@wil.cx, randy.dunlap@oracle.com, daniel.ritz-ml@swissonline.ch, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Tejun Heo wrote: > Andrew Morton wrote: >>> So, I guess it's NACK w/o suggested alternatives, right? >> I wouldn't nack without good reasons, and I have none here. I don't have >> very strong opinions either way. > > I was just wondering whether I should just go with snprintf dancing in > eh_link_report, which does make sense if not many need merging printk. .. Any chance you could poke through snprintf() and look for the off-by-one bug on the return result? (I think it happens when "n" is exceeded). :)