From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: James Simmons <jsimmons@infradead.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
devel@driverdev.osuosl.org,
Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@intel.com>,
Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@intel.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Lustre Development List <lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org>,
James Nunez <james.a.nunez@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] staging: lustre: Correct missing newline for CERROR call in sfw_handle_server_rpc
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2016 10:23:25 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1457807005.11972.9.camel@perches.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1457805636-23859-2-git-send-email-jsimmons@infradead.org>
On Sat, 2016-03-12 at 13:00 -0500, James Simmons wrote:
> From: James Nunez <james.a.nunez@intel.com>
>
> This is one of the fixes broken out of patch 10000 that was
> missed in the merger. With this fix the CERROR called in
> sfw_handle_server_rpc will print out correctly.
Speaking of CERROR and logging, it it really useful
for each CERROR use to have 2 static structs?
In CERROR -> CDEBUG_LIMIT there is a:
static struct cfs_debug_limit_state cdls;
(12 or 16 bytes depending on 32/64 bit arch)
and in CDEBUG_LIMIT -> _CDEBUG
static struct libcfs_debug_msg_data msgdata;
(24 or 36 bytes depending on 32/64 bit arch)
That seems a largish bit of data and code to initialize
these structs for over a thousand call sites.
Wouldn't a single static suffice?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-12 18:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-12 18:00 [PATCH 0/6] Last batch of lnet selftest cleanup James Simmons
2016-03-12 18:00 ` [PATCH 1/6] staging: lustre: Correct missing newline for CERROR call in sfw_handle_server_rpc James Simmons
2016-03-12 18:23 ` Joe Perches [this message]
2016-03-12 18:32 ` Drokin, Oleg
2016-03-12 18:56 ` Joe Perches
2016-03-12 19:17 ` Drokin, Oleg
2016-03-12 19:29 ` Joe Perches
2016-03-12 18:00 ` [PATCH 2/6] staging: lustre: add missing buffer overflow fix for console.c James Simmons
2016-03-12 18:00 ` [PATCH 3/6] staging: lustre: handle error returned from wait_event_timeout seltest timer James Simmons
2016-03-12 18:00 ` [PATCH 4/6] staging: lustre: remove excess blank lines in lnet selftest code James Simmons
2016-03-12 18:00 ` [PATCH 5/6] staging: lustre: realign some code in lnet selftest so its readable James Simmons
2016-03-12 18:00 ` [PATCH 6/6] staging: lustre: cleanup comment style for lnet selftest James Simmons
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1457807005.11972.9.camel@perches.com \
--to=joe@perches.com \
--cc=andreas.dilger@intel.com \
--cc=devel@driverdev.osuosl.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=james.a.nunez@intel.com \
--cc=jsimmons@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org \
--cc=oleg.drokin@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox