On Tue, 2015-12-29 at 00:20 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 11:42 PM, Rasmus Villemoes > <li...@rasmusvillemoes.dk> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 28 2015, Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 2015-12-28 at 20:18 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > xnumber() is a special helper to print a fixed size type in a > > > > hex format with > > > > '0x' prefix with padding and reduced size. In the module we > > > > have already > > > > several copies of such code. Consolidate them under xnumber() > > > > helper. > > > > > > > > There are couple of differences though. > > > > > > > > It seems nobody cared about the output in case of > > > > CONFIG_KALLSYMS=n when > > > > printing symbol address because the asked width is not enough > > > > to care either > > > > prefix or last byte. Fixed here. > > > > ok, though I'm curious what 'last byte' refers to here? > > The last byte ('78') as it appears in the string carrying the number > '0x12345678'. Yeah, might be confusing, I'm open for suggestion how > to > phrase it. > > > > > > > The %pNF specifier used to be allowed with a specific field > > > > width, though there > > > > is neither any user of it nor mention in the documentation. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.c > > > > om> > > > > --- > > > > lib/vsprintf.c | 43 +++++++++++++++--------------------------- > > > > - > > > > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/lib/vsprintf.c b/lib/vsprintf.c > > > > index dcf5646..e971549 100644 > > > > --- a/lib/vsprintf.c > > > > +++ b/lib/vsprintf.c > > > > @@ -514,6 +514,16 @@ char *number(char *buf, char *end, > > > > unsigned long long num, > > > > return buf; > > > > } > > > > > > > > +static noinline_for_stack > > > > +char *xnumber(char *buf, char *end, unsigned long long value, > > > > unsigned int type, > > > > + struct printf_spec spec) > > > > Is there any aspect of the passed-through printf_spec which isn't > > overridden in xnumber? The users are/will be various %p extensions, > > which probably means that no-one passes a non-default precision > > (gcc > > complains about %.*p), and the remaining possible flags (PLUS, > > LEFT, > > SPACE) are useless and/or impossible to pass to %p without gcc > > complaining. In other words, why pass the spec at all instead of > > just > > building it inside xnumber? > > Wow, good catch! > I slightly suspected something like that, but didn't made up my mind > to check this. > > > > > > xnumber isn't a great name. > > > > Maybe 'hexnumber'. > > We already have similar for %*ph. And as you noticed below… > > > That's a bit further away from 'number', and 'x' > > might stand for something other than hex. > > …isn't only about hex. I don't know how to play on words the all > three > flags including 16 base. > > > > > > unsigned int type should probably be size_t size > > > > Compromise: 'unsigned int size'. The name should be size since it's > > supposed to be the size of the actual type being printed. But the > > type > > carrying that information need not be 8 bytes wide on 64bits. > > Exactly, the result anyway as for now only 8 bits as a part of > unsigned int.
Oops, 24 bits of signed int. Incorrectly caught wrong line. So, I will change this to be int size then. > > > > > > > static noinline_for_stack > > > > char *address_val(char *buf, char *end, const void *addr, > > > > struct printf_spec spec, const char *fmt) > > > > { > > > > - unsigned long long num; > > > > - > > > > - spec.flags |= SPECIAL | SMALL | ZEROPAD; > > > > - spec.base = 16; > > > > - > > > > switch (fmt[1]) { > > > > case 'd': > > > > - num = *(const dma_addr_t *)addr; > > > > - spec.field_width = sizeof(dma_addr_t) * 2 + 2; > > > > - break; > > > > + return xnumber(buf, end, *(const dma_addr_t > > > > *)addr, sizeof(dma_addr_t), spec); > > > > case 'p': > > > > default: > > > > - num = *(const phys_addr_t *)addr; > > > > - spec.field_width = sizeof(phys_addr_t) * 2 + 2; > > > > - break; > > > > + return xnumber(buf, end, *(const phys_addr_t > > > > *)addr, sizeof(phys_addr_t), spec); > > > > } > > > > - > > > > - return number(buf, end, num, spec); > > > > } > > > > Nit: I think it would be a bit easier to read if the > > cast+dereference > > are kept outside the function calls. I'd suggest just introducing > > 'unsigned int size', assign the appropriate value in the two cases, > > and > > fall through to a common 'xnumber(buf, end, num, size);'. It'll > > even > > line up nicely ;-) > > Will try that. > > > > > num = *(const dma_addr_t *)addr; > > size = sizeof(dma_addr_t); > > Thanks, Rasmus, for review. > -- Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevche...@linux.intel.com> Intel Finland Oy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/