On Sun, 2014-01-05 at 12:15 +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Tetsuo Handa wrote: > > Since my purpose is to make reading of task_struct->comm consistent, > > %pT-like > > extension is what I want for centralizing pointer dereferences. > > If we have no objections for %pT[C012] patch,
I still believe emitting different output styles using %pT[012] is not ideal. Is this really necessary? I'd prefer that each element be described separately using %pT<type> where T is a struct task_struct and type is a member. type 'c' -> tsk.comm type 'p' -> tsk.pid type 't' -> task.tgid though if the real concern is simply comm consistency, maybe these other member types aren't at all useful. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
