lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jan]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 00/13] replace print_symbol() with printk()-s
On (01/05/18 21:01), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
[..]
> but, print_symbol() is compiled out on !CONFIG_KALLSYMS systems. so,
> basically, we compile out some of errors print outs; even more, on ia64
> ia64_do_show_stack() does nothing when there is no CONFIG_KALLSYMS [all
> ia64 defconfigs have KALLSYMS_ALL enabled]. printk(%pS), unlike
> print_symbol(), is not compiled out and prints the function address
> when symbolic name is not available. but, at a glance, print_symbol()
> in most of the cases has printk(registers) next to it or before it, so
> it doesn't look like we are introducing a regression here by switching
> to printk(%pS).

well, if this is a problem, then we can have

static inline void print_symbol(const char *fmt, unsigned long addr)
{
printk(fmt, addr);
}

for CONFIG_KALLSYMS builds, and an empty print_symbol() for !CONFIG_KALLSYMS
builds.


but we still have tons printk(%pS) in the kernel and even print_ip_sym()
(which is not compiled out on !CONFIG_KALLSYMS). so it seems to me that
we can drop print_symbol()/__print_symbol() and switch to printk(%pS)
after all.

-ss

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-01-05 13:24    [W:0.165 / U:0.492 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site