From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755587Ab2DXA0M (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Apr 2012 20:26:12 -0400 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122]:10346 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753640Ab2DXA0L (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Apr 2012 20:26:11 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=IaEFqBWa c=1 sm=0 a=ZycB6UtQUfgMyuk2+PxD7w==:17 a=XQbtiDEiEegA:10 a=3cFP2XwQnlkA:10 a=5SG0PmZfjMsA:10 a=Q9fys5e9bTEA:10 a=krVzvYWol8L9bVSQVugA:9 a=PUjeQqilurYA:10 a=ZycB6UtQUfgMyuk2+PxD7w==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Originating-IP: 74.67.80.29 Message-ID: <1335227168.28106.126.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/11] parse-events: Get rid of handling concatenation on event_read_print From: Steven Rostedt To: Namhyung Kim Cc: Frederic Weisbecker , Ingo Molnar , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Borislav Petkov , David Ahern , LKML Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 20:26:08 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87pqayrnwg.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com> References: <1335157118-14658-1-git-send-email-namhyung.kim@lge.com> <1335157118-14658-4-git-send-email-namhyung.kim@lge.com> <1335198822.28106.105.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <87pqayrnwg.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 09:09 +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 12:33:42 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Mon, 2012-04-23 at 13:58 +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote: > >> The concatenation of subsequent DQUOTE'd strings is handled > >> by __read_token() already. > >> > > > > You missed the point of this concat. It's not connecting "xxx" it is > > connecting "xxx" "yyy" into "xxxyyy", as some events do this. > > > > I think I don't :). Please see commit 0f15820 ("parse-events: > Concatinate two strings that are adjacent"). Heh, OK, I remember doing it for the print statement, but I guess I needed to do it for the token too. As the commits for both are almost identical. As the print was first, it must not have been enough, and I moved it to the token, but kept the first concat there. I still want to hold off on this patch just to make sure there's not something else that was missed. Thanks, -- Steve