On Wed, 2017-06-21 at 13:29 +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-06-21 at 13:40 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > From: Johannes Berg <johannes.b...@intel.com>
> >
> > There's no need to use the static UTS_RELEASE string, since
> > utsname()->release contains the same.
> >
> > This avoids rebuilding this file for every change of the
> > release string.
> > tcm_qla2xxx_wwn_version_show(struct config_item *item,
> > char *page)
> > {
> > return sprintf(page,
> > - "TCM QLOGIC QLA2XXX NPIV capable fabric module %s on
> > %s/%s on "
> > - UTS_RELEASE"\n", QLA2XXX_VERSION, utsname()->sysname,
> > - utsname()->machine);
> > + "TCM QLOGIC QLA2XXX NPIV capable fabric module %s on
> > %s/%s on %s\n",
> > + QLA2XXX_VERSION, utsname()->sysname,
> > + utsname()->machine, utsname()->release);
> > }
> Although this patch looks fine to me, I think removing the UTS
> release information from the output entirely would be even better. I
> think including that information in the output only made sense before
> LIO went upstream.
Well, yeah, maybe. But at least the part I preserved in the quote above
has userspace API implications, so I really didn't want to do that as a
drive-by patch submission :)
johannes
