[PATCH next v2 1/3] ethtool: Implement ethtool_puts()

[Justin Stitt]

On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 3:25 PM Vladimir Oltean <olteanv at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 03:09:59PM -0700, Justin Stitt wrote:
> > Should I undo this? I want my patch against next since it's targeting
> > some stuff in-flight over there. BUT, I also want ethtool_puts() to be
> > directly below ethtool_sprintf() in the source code. What to do?
>
> (removing everyone except the lists from CC, I don't want to go to email
> arest because of spamming too many recipients)
>
> What is the stuff in-flight in next that this is targeting?
>
> And why would anything prevent you from putting ethtool_puts() directly
> below ethtool_sprintf()?

The in-flight stuff consists of patches I sent changing some strncpy() usage
to

ethtool_sprintf(&data, "%s", something[i].name);

We can see them here [1]. I went for this approach initially but then
discussion came up about introducing ethtool_puts() which now
made my patches (some accepted into next already) semi-outdated
and in need of another swap from sprintf->puts() -- hence this series.

As far as the rebase, I simply took my commits and placed them on
top of next/master and got merge conflicts when ethtool_puts()
was placed below ethtool_sprintf(). All I have to do is move the hunks
around but since I formatted the file it's appearing in the diff. v3 will
be a clean diff.


[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/?q=dfb:ethtool_sprintf%20AND%20f:justinstitt

Thanks
Justin