Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 14 Sep 2017 15:44:05 +0900 | From | Sergey Senozhatsky <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 00/14] Fix wrong %pF and %pS printk format specifier usages |
| |
Hi,
On (09/08/17 22:49), Helge Deller wrote: [..] > Sergey, I'm sure there is a way how you can get it somehow to work the way > you describe above, but even then nobody can guarantee you that it > will work in 100% of the cases. > > It's somehow like "we have %lu and %c specifiers, and it's basically > the same, so let's try to figure out at runtime which one should be > used based on analysis of what was given as argument". > It may work somehow, but not always. > > What about the idea of a %luS specifier (or something other) ?
the idea is to have less format specifiers ;)
%pF/%pf is a subtle ABI detail, which made it to API.
I'm OK to keep %pf/%pF, if we won't be able to improve %ps/%pS. otherwise, I'd prefer to get rid of it.
-ss
| |