On Tue, Jun 3, 2025 at 6:18 AM Jiri Olsa <olsaj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > +static int btf_dump_string_data(struct btf_dump *d,
> > + const struct btf_type *t,
> > + __u32 id,
> > + const void *data)
> > +{
> > + const struct btf_array *array = btf_array(t);
> > + __u32 i;
> > +
> > + btf_dump_data_pfx(d);
> > + btf_dump_printf(d, "\"");
> > +
> > + for (i = 0; i < array->nelems; i++, data++) {
> > + char c;
> > +
> > + if (data >= d->typed_dump->data_end)
> > + return -E2BIG;
>
> curious, is this just string array without null terminating byte?
> should we just print " and return 0 instead of E2BIG error ?
Good question. That E2BIG error would happen, for example, if we tried
to print the array "{ 'a', 'b', 'c' }" when the type was "char[4]".
I'd say your proposed behavior would be consistent with the semantic of
".emit_strings should display strings in an intuitively useful way",
and I'd be in favor of doing that (replacing "return -E2BIG" with "break").
If others agree (specifically Andrii, who had comments about the semantics
yesterday), I'll make that change.
Blake
