Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Received-SPF: Pass (protection.outlook.com: domain of sony.com designates
 160.33.194.229 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com;
 client-ip=160.33.194.229; helo=usculsndmail02v.am.sony.com;
From:   <Tim.Bird@sony.com>
To:     <brendanhiggins@google.com>
CC:     <joe@perches.com>, <shuah@kernel.org>,
        <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>, <kunit-dev@googlegroups.com>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
        <frowand.list@gmail.com>, <sboyd@kernel.org>, <pmladek@suse.com>,
        <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>, <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        <rdunlap@infradead.org>, <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] kunit: fix failure to build without printk
Thread-Topic: [PATCH v2] kunit: fix failure to build without printk
Thread-Index: AQHVXYOHSzY8I+qIqESnE7HuJlTJpKcQk8yAgAIK7gCAAMSnAIAA6NiAgAAj6AD//87t0IAAUmyAgAAEeID//8ADsIAAScEA///D07A=
Date:   Sat, 31 Aug 2019 00:06:32 +0000
Message-ID: <ECADFF3FD767C149AD96A924E7EA6EAF977A846B@USCULXMSG01.am.sony.com>
References: <20190828093143.163302-1-brendanhiggins@google.com>
 <20190828094929.GA14038@jagdpanzerIV>
 <8b2d63bf-56cd-e8f5-e8ee-2891c2c1be8f@kernel.org>
 <f2d5b474411b2940d62198490f06e77890fbdb32.camel@perches.com>
 <20190830183821.GA30306@google.com>
 <bc688b00b2995e4b11229c3d4d90f532e00792c7.camel@perches.com>
 <ECADFF3FD767C149AD96A924E7EA6EAF977A8392@USCULXMSG01.am.sony.com>
 <ca01d8c4823c63db52fc0f18d62334aeb5634a50.camel@perches.com>
 <CAFd5g45X8bOiTWn5TMe3iEFwASafr6dWo6c4bG32uRKbQ+r5oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <ECADFF3FD767C149AD96A924E7EA6EAF977A8416@USCULXMSG01.am.sony.com>
 <20190830233710.GA101591@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20190830233710.GA101591@google.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Aug 2019 00:06:48.4476
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 597ce40b-7c6d-47e0-4186-08d72da71e83
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 66c65d8a-9158-4521-a2d8-664963db48e4
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalAttributedTenantConnectingIp: TenantId=66c65d8a-9158-4521-a2d8-664963db48e4;Ip=[160.33.194.229];Helo=[usculsndmail02v.am.sony.com]
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: HybridOnPrem
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MWHPR1301MB1968
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brendan Higgins=20
>=20
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 11:22:43PM +0000, Tim.Bird@sony.com wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Brendan Higgins
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 3:46 PM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 2019-08-30 at 21:58 +0000, Tim.Bird@sony.com wrote:
> > > > > > From: Joe Perches
> > > > []
> > > > > IMHO %pV should be avoided if possible.  Just because people are
> > > > > doing it doesn't mean it should be used when it is not necessary.
> > > >
> > > > Well, as the guy that created %pV, I of course
> > > > have a different opinion.
> > > >
> > > > > >  then wouldn't it be easier to pass in the
> > > > > > > kernel level as a separate parameter and then strip off all p=
rintk
> > > > > > > headers like this:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Depends on whether or not you care for overall
> > > > > > object size.  Consolidated formats with the
> > > > > > embedded KERN_<LEVEL> like suggested are smaller
> > > > > > overall object size.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is an argument I can agree with.  I'm generally in favor of
> > > > > things that lessen kernel size creep. :-)
> > > >
> > > > As am I.
> > >
> > > Sorry, to be clear, we are talking about the object size penalty due
> > > to adding a single parameter to a function. Is that right?
> >
> > Not exactly.  The argument is that pre-pending the different KERN_LEVEL
> > strings onto format strings can result in several versions of nearly id=
entical
> strings
> > being compiled into the object file.  By parameterizing this (that is, =
adding
> > '%s' into the format string, and putting the level into the string as a=
n
> argument),
> > it prevents this duplication of format strings.
> >
> > I haven't seen the data on duplication of format strings, and how much =
this
> > affects it, but little things can add up.  Whether it matters in this c=
ase
> depends
> > on whether the format strings that kunit uses are also used elsewhere i=
n
> the kernel,
> > and whether these same format strings are used with multiple kernel
> message levels.
> >  -- Tim
>=20
> I thought this portion of the discussion was about whether Joe's version
> of kunit_printk was better or my critique of his version of kunit_printk:
>=20
> Joe's:
> > > > > -void kunit_printk(const char *level,
> > > > > -		  const struct kunit *test,
> > > > > -		  const char *fmt, ...)
> > > > > +void kunit_printk(const struct kunit *test, const char *fmt, ...=
)
> > > > >  {
> > > > > +	char lvl[PRINTK_MAX_SINGLE_HEADER_LEN + 1] =3D "\0";
> > > > >  	struct va_format vaf;
> > > > >  	va_list args;
> > > > > +	int kern_level;
> > > > >
> > > > >  	va_start(args, fmt);
> > > > >
> > > > > +	while ((kern_level =3D printk_get_level(fmt)) !=3D 0) {
> > > > > +		size_t size =3D printk_skip_level(fmt) - fmt;
> > > > > +
> > > > > +		if (kern_level >=3D '0' && kern_level <=3D '7') {
> > > > > +			memcpy(lvl, fmt,  size);
> > > > > +			lvl[size] =3D '\0';
> > > > > +		}
> > > > > +		fmt +=3D size;
> > > > > +	}
> > > > > +
> > > > >  	vaf.fmt =3D fmt;
> > > > >  	vaf.va =3D &args;
> > > > >
> > > > > -	kunit_vprintk(test, level, &vaf);
> > > > > +	printk("%s\t# %s %pV\n", lvl, test->name, &vaf);
> > > > >
> > > > >  	va_end(args);
> > > > >  }
>=20
> Mine:
> >  void kunit_printk(const char *level,
> >  		  const struct kunit *test,
> >  		  const char *fmt, ...)
> >  {
> >  	struct va_format vaf;
> >  	va_list args;
> >
> >  	va_start(args, fmt);
> >
> > +	fmt =3D printk_skip_headers(fmt);
> > +
> >  	vaf.fmt =3D fmt;
> >  	vaf.va =3D &args;
> >
> > -	kunit_vprintk(test, level, &vaf);
> > +	printk("%s\t# %s %pV\n", level, test->name, &vaf);
> >
> >  	va_end(args);
> >  }
>=20
> I thought you and Joe were arguing that "Joe's" resulted in a smaller
> object size than "Mine" (not to be confused with the actual patch I
> presented here, which is what Sergey suggested I do on a different
> thread).
>=20
> I really don't feel strongly about what Sergey suggested I do (which is
> what this patch originally introduced), versus, what Joe suggested,
> versus what I suggested in response to Joe (or any of the things
> suggested on other threads). I just want to pick one, fix the breakage
> in linux-next, and move on with my life.

When in doubt, do what the sub-system maintainer says.  I'd go
with Sergey's suggestion.  Maintainers often are juggling a host
of issues, and weighing new features and usages of their system
against their long-term plans for their sub-system.  Sometimes
they have time to communicate all the intricacies of their
counter-proposals, and sometimes not.

But they know their system best, and much more often than not
provide sound advice.

If you don't have a strong feeling about it, just do what they
say.
 -- Tim