On 03/06/2017 08:16 PM, Andrey Konovalov wrote: >> >> What about >> >> Object at ffff880068388540 belongs to cache kmalloc-128 of size 128 >> Accessed address is 123 bytes inside of [ffff880068388540, ffff8800683885c0) >> >> ? > > Another alternative: > > Accessed address is 123 bytes inside of [ffff880068388540, ffff8800683885c0) > Object belongs to cache kmalloc-128 of size 128 >
Is it something wrong with just printing offset at the end as I suggested earlier? It's more compact and also more clear IMO.
