From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 0/3] seq_printf/puts/putc: Start to convert to return void Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 00:20:40 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20131211.002040.1061939246483044835.davem@davemloft.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, keescook@chromium.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, netfilter@vger.kernel.org, coreteam@netfilter.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org To: joe@perches.com Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:54579 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750774Ab3LKFUm (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Dec 2013 00:20:42 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Joe Perches Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 21:12:41 -0800 > Many uses of the return value of seq_printf/seq_puts/seq_putc are > incorrect. Many assume that the return value is the number of > chars emitted into a buffer like printf/puts/putc. > > It would be better to make the return value of these functions void > to avoid these misuses. > > Start to do so. > Convert seq_overflow to a public function from a static function. > > Remove the return uses of seq_printf/seq_puts/seq_putc from net. > Add a seq_overflow function call instead. I'm fine with this going in whatever tree is appropriate for the seq_overflow un-static change: Acked-by: David S. Miller