From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.7 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_NEOMUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 775C9C48BD8 for ; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 10:46:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C5BB2082F for ; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 10:46:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727207AbfFZKqj (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jun 2019 06:46:39 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:33994 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726387AbfFZKqh (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jun 2019 06:46:37 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE25DAD78; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 10:46:35 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 12:46:33 +0200 From: Petr Mladek To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Andy Shevchenko , Rasmus Villemoes , Linus Torvalds , "Tobin C . Harding" , Joe Perches , Andrew Morton , Michal Hocko , Sergey Senozhatsky , Steven Rostedt , Sergey Senozhatsky , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 07/10] vsprintf: Consolidate handling of unknown pointer specifiers Message-ID: <20190626104633.arpobvevpxnkrt5k@pathway.suse.cz> References: <20190417115350.20479-1-pmladek@suse.com> <20190417115350.20479-8-pmladek@suse.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170912 (1.9.0) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue 2019-06-25 12:59:57, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Petr, > > On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 1:56 PM Petr Mladek wrote: > > There are few printk formats that make sense only with two or more > > specifiers. Also some specifiers make sense only when a kernel feature > > is enabled. > > > > The handling of unknown specifiers is inconsistent and not helpful. > > Using WARN() looks like an overkill for this type of error. pr_warn() > > is not good either. It would by handled via printk_safe buffer and > > it might be hard to match it with the problematic string. > > > > A reasonable compromise seems to be writing the unknown format specifier > > into the original string with a question mark, for example (%pC?). > > It should be self-explaining enough. Note that it is in brackets > > to follow the (null) style. > > > > Note that it introduces a warning about that test_hashed() function > > is unused. It is going to be used again by a later patch. > > > > Signed-off-by: Petr Mladek > > > --- a/lib/vsprintf.c > > +++ b/lib/vsprintf.c > > @@ -1706,7 +1712,7 @@ char *clock(char *buf, char *end, struct clk *clk, struct printf_spec spec, > > #ifdef CONFIG_COMMON_CLK > > return string(buf, end, __clk_get_name(clk), spec); > > #else > > - return ptr_to_id(buf, end, clk, spec); > > + return string_nocheck(buf, end, "(%pC?)", spec); > > What's the reason behind this change? This is not an error case, > but for printing the clock pointer as a distinguishable ID when using > the legacy clock framework, which does not store names with clocks. You are right. We should put back ptr_to_id() there. Would you like to send a patch? Best Regards, Petr