From: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
To: Taku Izumi <izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
x86@kernel.org, matt.fleming@intel.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, tony.luck@intel.com,
qiuxishi@huawei.com, kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com,
ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com>, Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] efi: Change abbreviation of EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME from "RUN" to "RT"
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 14:27:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150909132710.GG4973@codeblueprint.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1440609089-14787-1-git-send-email-izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com>
On Thu, 27 Aug, at 02:11:29AM, Taku Izumi wrote:
> Now efi_md_typeattr_format() outputs "RUN" if passed EFI memory
> descriptor has EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME attribute. But "RT" is preferer
> because it is shorter and clearer.
>
> This patch changes abbreviation of EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME from "RUN"
> to "RT".
>
> Suggested-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Taku Izumi <izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com>
> ---
> drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c
> index 8124078..25b6477 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c
> @@ -594,8 +594,8 @@ char * __init efi_md_typeattr_format(char *buf, size_t size,
> snprintf(pos, size, "|attr=0x%016llx]",
> (unsigned long long)attr);
> else
> - snprintf(pos, size, "|%3s|%2s|%2s|%2s|%2s|%3s|%2s|%2s|%2s|%2s]",
> - attr & EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME ? "RUN" : "",
> + snprintf(pos, size, "|%2s|%2s|%2s|%2s|%2s|%3s|%2s|%2s|%2s|%2s]",
> + attr & EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME ? "RT" : "",
> attr & EFI_MEMORY_MORE_RELIABLE ? "MR" : "",
> attr & EFI_MEMORY_XP ? "XP" : "",
> attr & EFI_MEMORY_RP ? "RP" : "",
I know that Ard suggested this change but I don't think I should apply
this and the reason is that developers, particularly distro
developers, come to rely on the output we print for debugging
purposes.
They don't necessarily monitor all the patches getting merged upstream
closely enough to realise that it impacts their debugging strategy. So
when they notice that the output has gone from "RUN" to "RT" they're
naturally going to ask what the difference is... and the answer is "it
looks prettier". That's not a good enough reason.
Obviously if we're printing something that's completely incorrect, or
we can improve the message considerably, then yes, it makes sense to
change it - but that's not the case here.
Thanks for the patch, but sorry, I'm not going to apply this one.
--
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-09 13:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-26 17:10 [PATCH v2 0/3] Introduce "efi_fake_mem_mirror" boot option Taku Izumi
2015-08-26 17:11 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] efi: Add EFI_MEMORY_MORE_RELIABLE support to efi_md_typeattr_format() Taku Izumi
2015-09-09 13:16 ` Matt Fleming
2015-08-26 17:11 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] efi: Change abbreviation of EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME from "RUN" to "RT" Taku Izumi
2015-09-09 13:27 ` Matt Fleming [this message]
2015-09-09 13:28 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-08-26 17:11 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] x86, efi: Add "efi_fake_mem_mirror" boot option Taku Izumi
2015-09-09 13:51 ` Matt Fleming
2015-09-09 14:16 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2015-09-12 10:41 ` Matt Fleming
2015-09-14 7:20 ` Ard Biesheuvel
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=20150909132710.GG4973@codeblueprint.co.uk \
--to=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=lersek@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=matt.fleming@intel.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pjones@redhat.com \
--cc=qiuxishi@huawei.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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