[U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3] Add stricmp() and strnicmp()

[Simon Glass]

Hi Wolfgang,

On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Wolfgang Denk <wd at denx.de> wrote:
> Dear Simon Glass,
>
> In message <1351979121-3769-3-git-send-email-sjg at chromium.org> you wrote:
>> strnicmp() is present but disabled. Make it available and define stricmp()
>> also. There is a only a small performance penalty to having stricmp()
>> call strnicmp(), so do this instead of a standalone function, to save code
>> space.
>>
>> BRANCH=none
>
> Please get rid of such entries in the commit messages!!!!
>
> Consider all patches that contain such entries as NAKed.

Yes it is annoying - I submitted a patch to patman to remove this and
another gerrit one also. In the meantime I have to be careful!

>
>> +int strnicmp(const char *s1, const char *s2, size_t len);
>> +
>> +int stricmp(const char *s1, const char *s2);
>
> Who are the users of this?   I object against adding dead code.
>
> If users will be added later, this patch should go into the series
> adding the users.

OK, messaged received loud and clear. It does require a change of
process at my end - now I have to find relationships between commits
in different series going to different maintainers and try to tie them
together. Just one more thing to worry about.

But I understand your concern that, in fact, if there is no user
immediately forthcoming, then it will just sit there and no one will
notice if it is dead code.

BTW, is there any easy way to obtain build-coverage information for
U-Boot? In other words, can we easily find code that is not enabled by
any existing board? That might be an interesting investigation.

Regards,
Simon

>
> Best regards,
>
> Wolfgang Denk
>
> --
> DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
> HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
> Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
> Severe culture shock results when experts from another protocol suite
> [...] try to read OSI documents. The term "osified" is used to  refer
> to  such  documents. [...] Any relationship to the word "ossified" is
> purely intentional.                                - Marshall T. Rose