Re: [PATCH net-next 6/9] net: hns: normalize two different loop

[Daode Huang]

On 2016/6/27 20:13, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-06-27 at 05:08 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Mon, 2016-06-27 at 15:00 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2016-06-27 at 04:49 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2016-06-27 at 17:54 +0800, Yisen Zhuang wrote:
> > > > > From: Daode Huang <huangdaode@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > >
> > > > > There are two approaches to assign data, one does 2 loops,
> > > > > another
> > > > > does 1 loop. This patch normalize the different methods to 1
> > > > > loop.
> > > > []
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/hisilicon/hns/hns_dsaf_main.c
> > > > > b/drivers/net/ethernet/hisilicon/hns/hns_dsaf_main.c
> > > > []
> > > > > @@ -2567,15 +2567,15 @@ static char
> > > > > *hns_dsaf_get_node_stats_strings(char *data, int node,
> > > > >   	buff += ETH_GSTRING_LEN;
> > > > >   	if (node < DSAF_SERVICE_NW_NUM && !is_ver1) {
> > > > >   		for (i = 0; i < DSAF_PRIO_NR; i++) {
> > > > > -			snprintf(buff, ETH_GSTRING_LEN,
> > > > > -				 "inod%d_pfc_prio%d_pkts",
> > > > > node,
> > > > > i);
> > > > > -			buff += ETH_GSTRING_LEN;
> > > > > -		}
> > > > > -		for (i = 0; i < DSAF_PRIO_NR; i++) {
> > > > > -			snprintf(buff, ETH_GSTRING_LEN,
> > > > > -				 "onod%d_pfc_prio%d_pkts",
> > > > > node,
> > > > > i);
> > > > > +			snprintf(buff + 0 * ETH_GSTRING_LEN *
> > > > > DSAF_PRIO_NR,
> > > > > +				 ETH_GSTRING_LEN,
> > > > > "inod%d_pfc_prio%d_pkts",
> > > > > +				 node, i);
> > > > > +			snprintf(buff + 1 * ETH_GSTRING_LEN *
> > > > > DSAF_PRIO_NR,
> > > > > +				 ETH_GSTRING_LEN,
> > > > > "onod%d_pfc_prio%d_pkts",
> > > > > +				 node, i);
> > > > >   			buff += ETH_GSTRING_LEN;
> > > > This looks odd and likely incorrect.
> > > Why? the idea is to print stats for Rx and Tx at once.
> > >
> > > I hope it was tested.
> > It changes the order of the strings in buff.
> I don't see how.
Hi Andy,
The patch has been tested when sent out.

> > Is a bug fix or a style fix?
> >
> > If it's a bug fix, then it should likely be added
> > to the stable trees.
> I doubt it's a bug fix.

Because the previous patch is accepted in net-next, and this set is
an appendix to the series, in order to avoid merge conflict, we also
send this bug fix to net-next.

thanks.

>