From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF65BC433DF for ; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 19:43:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5E82820714 for ; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 19:43:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="O0zD/ign" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 5E82820714 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49m1w36sMpzDqd2 for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 05:43:15 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=intel.com (client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::541; helo=mail-ed1-x541.google.com; envelope-from=dan.j.williams@intel.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20150623 header.b=O0zD/ign; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail-ed1-x541.google.com (mail-ed1-x541.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::541]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49m1sZ0pNPzDqX1 for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 05:41:03 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-ed1-x541.google.com with SMTP id t21so12382623edr.12 for ; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 12:41:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=4s29RXI4DZmoz7Uu9spIoKDjM10KzT1NJ7eoQ6iGuKQ=; b=O0zD/ignX49ZyEfuD6nUnsJTM4Z2o6FY8NMNsDmSNfe6aQVWNrOXTRTPjuGCOQ7uCB k9fwQ/N07Of5R++0Wqywf7IkNDOTgpQYrKqFq25Z4tEh9kpSx0iQG8sB0skjvtknQbe8 LAlKIYFmc59bA3kzhgA6+V+U1gaq//XY0YNfP9M1mcKrtpnepdygD4ppBX7FT2nrwDnH SQHjoOUEzTNzr7VSEmdqRr8gky5IcYTdj1QWaJduNkBbFQDElcSFHxEf5PNUM5ITYStm 7DRJEHhlCSLXRKelwGOwYMezexaBwP1VefdC3djrn0BKXNFFcPnyNgUmAm3/YL88FCYy QPOg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=4s29RXI4DZmoz7Uu9spIoKDjM10KzT1NJ7eoQ6iGuKQ=; b=L+FXLw16JLkZxy6pPm1M4FK+xVE2liutrImnC9rv9/J9/uJWpwZRx0ZwCEXreDGIUS 9nDI3vHSSWS/mazuhfR8qJWPOO7CyIGU4Aomfxdfu606lXRN8mbMo0xX81LX7f0Wn9bO /PZIuu4FxyFyqTL4/BITAV8AGBHExBjcfVtHoXcLnqu+HKy1EV5cDFk/ZNnTWT9ZrNfy 3aTOGGovrhNQJqiU9drAAqZfSy1DJlQYskWofRsp5s0VaN+UoEe3qNf+1PPKstV78MAJ YP48+0SPXYM5jGbL/grIrIh5xv0DfMc0EiyZF5LVCySt9ZImEN5yKQ4I8CWx2reJVZEM ZnyQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530R9ww1B5f/sBCr6UoaHs5fOOEWJ4EQ9TvZykjmQ/tXqbqsPV0h n7uK8kluIrGHYFDQ9nOnRL+UkVvBwA5dfsiWArS3hg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw7gZGRCrEp8Uckb0OtIxiFQkW6W0bIFXefK59EdVk9QlmbMAZVSR15quYWqkF3RICuTtvR0uovNicOGRMtPBI= X-Received: by 2002:a50:c359:: with SMTP id q25mr26045616edb.123.1592250060573; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 12:41:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200615124407.32596-1-vaibhav@linux.ibm.com> <20200615124407.32596-3-vaibhav@linux.ibm.com> <20200615125552.GI14668@zn.tnic> In-Reply-To: <20200615125552.GI14668@zn.tnic> From: Dan Williams Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 12:40:49 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 2/6] seq_buf: Export seq_buf_printf To: Borislav Petkov Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Santosh Sivaraj , Ira Weiny , linux-nvdimm , Cezary Rojewski , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Steven Rostedt , Piotr Maziarz , Christoph Hellwig , Oliver O'Halloran , "Aneesh Kumar K . V" , Vaibhav Jain , linuxppc-dev Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 5:56 AM Borislav Petkov wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 06:14:03PM +0530, Vaibhav Jain wrote: > > 'seq_buf' provides a very useful abstraction for writing to a string > > buffer without needing to worry about it over-flowing. However even > > though the API has been stable for couple of years now its still not > > exported to kernel loadable modules limiting its usage. > > > > Hence this patch proposes update to 'seq_buf.c' to mark > > seq_buf_printf() which is part of the seq_buf API to be exported to > > kernel loadable GPL modules. This symbol will be used in later parts > > of this patch-set to simplify content creation for a sysfs attribute. > > > > Cc: Piotr Maziarz > > Cc: Cezary Rojewski > > Cc: Christoph Hellwig > > Cc: Steven Rostedt > > Cc: Borislav Petkov > > Acked-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) > > Signed-off-by: Vaibhav Jain > > --- > > Changelog: > > > > v12..v13: > > * None > > > > v11..v12: > > * None > > Can you please resend your patchset once a week like everyone else and > not flood inboxes with it? Hi Boris, I gave Vaibhav some long shot hope that his series could be included in my libnvdimm pull request for -rc1. Save for a last minute clang report that I misread as a gcc warning, I likely would have included. This spin is looking to address the last of the comments I had and something I would consider for -rc2. So, in this case the resends were requested by me and I'll take the grumbles on Vaibhav's behalf.