We are able to detect invalid values handled by %p[iI] printk specifier.
The current error message is "invalid address". It might cause confusion
against "(efault)" reported by the generic valid_pointer_address() check.

Let's unify the style and use the more appropriate error code description

Signed-off-by: Petr Mladek <pmla...@suse.com>
 Documentation/core-api/printk-formats.rst | 1 +
 lib/vsprintf.c                            | 2 +-
 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/core-api/printk-formats.rst 
index dc020087b12a..974af53e9b43 100644
--- a/Documentation/core-api/printk-formats.rst
+++ b/Documentation/core-api/printk-formats.rst
@@ -56,6 +56,7 @@ might be printed instead of the unreachable information::
        (null)   data on plain NULL address
        (efault) data on invalid address
+       (einval) invalid data on a valid address
 Plain Pointers
diff --git a/lib/vsprintf.c b/lib/vsprintf.c
index 1a080a75a825..4fcd4ce91d32 100644
--- a/lib/vsprintf.c
+++ b/lib/vsprintf.c
@@ -1395,7 +1395,7 @@ char *ip_addr_string(char *buf, char *end, void *ptr, 
struct printf_spec spec,
                case AF_INET6:
                        return ip6_addr_string_sa(buf, end, &sa->v6, spec, fmt);
-                       return __string(buf, end, "(invalid address)", spec);
+                       return __string(buf, end, "(einval)", spec);

Reply via email to