On Fri, 2018-04-06 at 15:12 +0200, Petr Mladek wrote: > On Wed 2018-04-04 07:26:07, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Wed, 2018-04-04 at 10:58 +0200, Petr Mladek wrote: > > > Move the code from the long pointer() function. We are going to add a > > > check > > > for the access to the address that will make it even more complicated. > > > > > > This patch does not change the existing behavior. > > > > But it might increase stack consumption. > > > > As the %pV is recursive, this is may not be a good thing. > > It seems to be safe to pass just a pointer to struct printf_spec. > In fact, it would make sense to use this also in string() and > __string() calls. Copying 64 bytes many times look useless.
huh? struct printf_spec is 64 bits, the same size as a pointer on 64 bit systems. I'm dubious about this entire patch series.
