* Tobin C. Harding <[email protected]> [2018-01-08 17:35:59]: > On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 12:01:04PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria wrote: > > > > > > On 01/08/2018 10:49 AM, Srikar Dronamraju wrote: > > > * Ravi Bangoria <[email protected]> [2018-01-06 11:12:46]: > > > > > >> Recently, how the pointers being printed with %p has been changed > > >> by commit ad67b74d2469 ("printk: hash addresses printed with %p"). > > >> This is causing a regression while showing offset in the > > >> uprobe_events file. Instead of %p, use %px to display offset. > > >> > > >> Signed-off-by: Ravi Bangoria <[email protected]> > > >> --- > > >> kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c | 2 +- > > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > >> > > >> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c > > >> index 40592e7b3568..268029ae1be6 100644 > > >> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c > > >> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c > > >> @@ -608,7 +608,7 @@ static int probes_seq_show(struct seq_file *m, void > > >> *v) > > >> > > >> /* Don't print "0x (null)" when offset is 0 */ > > >> if (tu->offset) { > > >> - seq_printf(m, "0x%p", (void *)tu->offset); > > >> + seq_printf(m, "0x%px", (void *)tu->offset); > > >> } else { > > >> switch (sizeof(void *)) { > > >> case 4: > > > Looks good to me. Did you consider %pK instead of %px? > > > > Thanks Srikar, > > > > Checked %pK. But I see same issue with that: > > > > perf probe: > > Opening /sys/kernel/debug/tracing//uprobe_events write=1 > > Writing event: p:probe_a/main /tmp/a.out:0x58c > > > > cat /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/uprobe_events: > > p:probe_a/main /tmp/a.out:0x0000000014fd571e > > %pK behaves the same as %p (hashes address) when kpt_restrict==0 > > Hope this helps,
Thanks Tobin for the clarification. So %px is the right choice. -- thanks and regards Srikar
