On Sat, 2013-10-12 at 22:13 +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote: [] > To fix that, we use %pS only for stack addresses printouts (via newly > added printk_stack_address) and %pB for regs->ip (via printk_address). > I.e. we revert to the old behaviour for all except call stacks. And > since from all those reliable is 1, we remove that parameter from > printk_address.
I'm still waiting for you to apply this: https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/22/701 https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/22/700 Oh wait, wrong Jiri... ;-) Anyway, I'd rather your specific changes be done inline so it's less possible to have interleaved messages. > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kdebug.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kdebug.h [] > @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ enum die_val { > DIE_NMIUNKNOWN, > }; > > -extern void printk_address(unsigned long address, int reliable); > +extern void printk_address(unsigned long address); I think this can be removed. > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c b/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c [] > @@ -25,12 +25,17 @@ unsigned int code_bytes = 64; > int kstack_depth_to_print = 3 * STACKSLOTS_PER_LINE; > static int die_counter; > > -void printk_address(unsigned long address, int reliable) > +static void printk_stack_address(unsigned long address, int reliable) > { > pr_cont(" [<%p>] %s%pB\n", > (void *)address, reliable ? "" : "? ", (void *)address); > } This is now used only once and could/should be done at the single use site. > +void printk_address(unsigned long address) > +{ > + pr_cont(" [<%p>] %pS\n", (void *)address, (void *)address); > +} > + And this could/should be done inline in the few places it's used. > #ifdef CONFIG_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER > static void > print_ftrace_graph_addr(unsigned long addr, void *data, > @@ -151,7 +156,7 @@ static void print_trace_address(void *data, unsigned long > addr, int reliable) > { > touch_nmi_watchdog(); > printk(data); > - printk_address(addr, reliable); > + printk_stack_address(addr, reliable); printk("%s [<%p>] %s%pB\n", data, (void *)addr, reliable ? "" : "? ", (void *)addr); > @@ -281,7 +286,7 @@ int __kprobes __die(const char *str, struct pt_regs > *regs, long err) > #else > /* Executive summary in case the oops scrolled away */ > printk(KERN_ALERT "RIP "); > - printk_address(regs->ip, 1); > + printk_address(regs->ip); printk(KERN_ALERT "RIP [<%p>] %pS\n", (void *)regs->ip, (void *)regs->ip); > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c b/arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c [] > @@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ void __show_regs(struct pt_regs *regs, int all) > unsigned int ds, cs, es; > > printk(KERN_DEFAULT "RIP: %04lx:[<%016lx>] ", regs->cs & 0xffff, > regs->ip); > - printk_address(regs->ip, 1); > + printk_address(regs->ip); printk(KERN_DEFAULT "RIP: %04lx:[<%016lx>] [<%p>] %pS\n", regs->cs & 0xffff, regs->ip, (void *)regs->ip, (void *)regs->ip); This one looks ugly to me. It emits the address twice. > printk(KERN_DEFAULT "RSP: %04lx:%016lx EFLAGS: %08lx\n", regs->ss, > regs->sp, regs->flags); > printk(KERN_DEFAULT "RAX: %016lx RBX: %016lx RCX: %016lx\n", > diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c > index 3aaeffc..18feeb3 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c > @@ -596,7 +596,7 @@ show_fault_oops(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long > error_code, > > printk(KERN_CONT " at %p\n", (void *) address); > printk(KERN_ALERT "IP:"); > - printk_address(regs->ip, 1); > + printk_address(regs->ip); printk(KERN_ALERT "IP: [<%p>] %pS\n", (void *)regs->ip, (void *)regs->ip); > dump_pagetable(address); > } > diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/uv/uv_nmi.c b/arch/x86/platform/uv/uv_nmi.c > index 9126dfb..019b6ec 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/platform/uv/uv_nmi.c > +++ b/arch/x86/platform/uv/uv_nmi.c > @@ -402,7 +402,7 @@ static void uv_nmi_dump_cpu_ip(int cpu, struct pt_regs > *regs) > printk(KERN_DEFAULT "UV: %4d %6d %-32.32s ", > cpu, current->pid, current->comm); > > - printk_address(regs->ip, 1); > + printk_address(regs->ip); printk(KERN_DEFAULT "UV: %4d %6d %-32.32s [<%p>] %pS\n", cpu, current->pid, current->comm, (void *)regs->ip, (void *)regs->ip); -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
