lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Nov]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCHv4 5/6] symbol lookup: introduce dereference_symbol_descriptor()
On Sat 2017-11-11 13:49:32, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (11/10/17 10:09), Luck, Tony wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 08:48:29AM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > > -Examples::
> > > -
> > > - printk("Going to call: %pF\n", gettimeofday);
> > > - printk("Going to call: %pF\n", p->func);
> > > - printk("%s: called from %pS\n", __func__, (void *)_RET_IP_);
> > > - printk("%s: called from %pS\n", __func__,
> > > - (void *)__builtin_return_address(0));
> > > - printk("Faulted at %pS\n", (void *)regs->ip);
> > > - printk(" %s%pB\n", (reliable ? "" : "? "), (void *)*stack);
> >
> > Did you mean to delete the Examples completely? Wouldn't it
> > be better to just update (s/%pF/%pS/g)?
>
> good question. yes, I think I did it deliberately :) we still
> kinda have some sort of "examples", right at the beginning of
> section "Symbols/Function Pointers"

These extra examples were added just recently (v4.14-rc1)
by the commit fd46cd55fbc5a8e8c ("printk-formats.txt: Add examples
for %pF and %pS usage"). They were supposed to help using
%pF and %pS correctly according to the situation. But we
have a better solution now. %pF is obsoleted by this
patchset.

IMHO, it is perfectly fine to remove the extra examples.

Best Regards,
Petr

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-11-28 16:45    [W:0.088 / U:5.744 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site