Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: RFC: introduce struct ksymbol | From | Joe Perches <> | Date | Fri, 17 Apr 2009 00:55:33 -0700 |
| |
On Wed, 2009-04-15 at 20:21 +0930, Rusty Russell wrote: > On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 03:28:39 pm Ingo Molnar wrote: > > Why not 'struct ksym'? That name is unused right now, it is shorter > > and just as descriptive. > > > > Regarding the change... dunno. Sam, Rusty - what do you think? > > Yes, ksym is nice. But agree with you that it's marginal obfuscation > to wrap it in a struct. > > The current symbol printing APIs are awful; we should address them first > (like the %pF patch does) IMHO.
I suggest just %pS<type>
With %pS, struct ksym is probably not all that useful unless it's for something like a sscanf.
Today there are these symbol uses: name, offset, size, modname
So perhaps %pS<foo> where foo is any combination of:
n name o offset s size m modname a all
and if not specified is a name lookup ("%pSn").
| |