Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:1;
Date:   Thu, 14 Dec 2023 12:14:56 +0200 (EET)
From:   =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Ilpo_J=E4rvinen?= <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
To:     Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
cc:     linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
        Shaopeng Tan <tan.shaopeng@jp.fujitsu.com>,
        =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Maciej_Wiecz=F3r-Retman?= 
        <maciej.wieczor-retman@intel.com>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 07/29] selftests/resctrl: Refactor get_cbm_mask() and
 rename to get_full_cbm()
In-Reply-To: <150fbd26-cb36-48f8-bd23-fc2eb83f03f2@intel.com>
Message-ID: <77e1b59b-1b7d-9ed0-41a5-fe252daec38@linux.intel.com>
References: <20231211121826.14392-1-ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com> <20231211121826.14392-8-ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com> <150fbd26-cb36-48f8-bd23-fc2eb83f03f2@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="8323329-1036506092-1702548902=:5690"
Precedence: bulk

  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

--8323329-1036506092-1702548902=:5690
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT

On Wed, 13 Dec 2023, Reinette Chatre wrote:

> Hi Ilpo,
> 
> On 12/11/2023 4:18 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> 
> > -int get_cbm_mask(char *cache_type, char *cbm_mask)
> > +static int get_bit_mask(const char *filename, unsigned long *mask)
> >  {
> > -	char cbm_mask_path[1024];
> >  	FILE *fp;
> >  
> > -	if (!cbm_mask)
> > +	if (!filename || !mask)
> >  		return -1;
> >  
> > -	sprintf(cbm_mask_path, "%s/%s/cbm_mask", INFO_PATH, cache_type);
> > -
> > -	fp = fopen(cbm_mask_path, "r");
> > +	fp = fopen(filename, "r");
> >  	if (!fp) {
> > -		ksft_perror("Failed to open cache level");
> > -
> > +		fprintf(stderr, "Failed to open bit mask file '%s': %s\n",
> > +			filename, strerror(errno));
> >  		return -1;
> >  	}
> > -	if (fscanf(fp, "%s", cbm_mask) <= 0) {
> > -		ksft_perror("Could not get max cbm_mask");
> > +
> > +	if (fscanf(fp, "%lx", mask) <= 0) {
> > +		fprintf(stderr, "Could not read bit mask file '%s': %s\n",
> > +			filename, strerror(errno));
> >  		fclose(fp);
> >  
> >  		return -1;
> 
> After seeing the new effort to correct the perror() messages it is
> not obvious to me why this patch changes these particular messages to
> use fprintf(stderr, ...).

Yeah, good point, thanks. Somehow I dismissed the opportunity and thought 
there's no need to do anything even if this came up during series conflict 
resolution phase.


-- 
 i.

--8323329-1036506092-1702548902=:5690--