On Tue, 2008-07-22 at 20:36 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> concordia powerpc(master) $ find arch/powerpc/ ! -name '*32.*' | xargs
> grep "%l" | grep -v "%ll" | wc -l
> 635
>
>
> Someone's gonna get a lot of git points for fixing all those. Might
> keep
> the speeling fix crowd busy for a
But
>
> This is (IMO) a desirable change and will prevent a heck of a lot of
> goofing around, and will permit a lot of prior goofing around to
> be removed.
>
> But I bet there are lots of instalces of printk("%l", some_u64) down in
> arch code where the type of u64 _is_ known which will now spew w
On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 20:36:35 +1000 Michael Ellerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-07-22 at 03:05 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 20:03:51 -0600 Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > [PATCH] Make u64 long long on all architectures
> > >
> > > It is cur
On Tue, 2008-07-22 at 03:05 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 20:03:51 -0600 Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > [PATCH] Make u64 long long on all architectures
> >
> > It is currently awkward to print a u64 type. Some architectures use
> > unsigned long while others u
On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 20:03:51 -0600 Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [PATCH] Make u64 long long on all architectures
>
> It is currently awkward to print a u64 type. Some architectures use
> unsigned long while others use unsigned long long. Since unsigned long
> long is 64-bit for all
On Fri, Jul 04, 2008 at 02:36:21PM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> It's also true for parisc, fwiw. Added a cc to them.
>
I posted a patch months ago for kallsyms on parisc, but it looks like
nobody ever responded or cared. Nice.
___
Linuxppc-dev mailin
On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:28:18 +1000 Michael Ellerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Wasn't that already merged via the trivial scheduler fixes tree or
> something? ;)
Not yet.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
pgp7ahdw8jTpz.pgp
De
On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 13:26 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Did a few tests and it seems to work. I'll stick a patch converting
> > powerpc to use %pS for oops display in -next.
>
> After you post it to linuxppc-dev and get review comments, of
> course ...
I though I did that already, looks li
On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 13:26 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 11:14:36 +1000 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 16:25 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, 5 Jul 2008, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'll
On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 11:14:36 +1000 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 16:25 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 5 Jul 2008, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > >
> > > I'll give it a try using probe_kernel_address() instead on monday.
> >
> > Her
On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 16:25 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Sat, 5 Jul 2008, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> >
> > I'll give it a try using probe_kernel_address() instead on monday.
>
> Here's the updated patch which uses probe_kernel_address() instead (and
> moves the whole #ifdef mess ou
On Sun, 6 Jul 2008 03:02:59 +0300 Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 05, 2008 at 08:41:39PM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
> >> Single letters are bad because it hurts readability and limits the
> >> usefulness of the extension.
>
> On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 9:52 PM, Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> w
* Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> yeah, agreed, combined it's not an x86 topic anymore.
>
> [ There's some lkml trouble so i've missed the earlier patch. I'm not
> sure the email problem is on my side, see how incomplete the
> discussion is on lkml.org as well:
>
> http://lk
* Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Jul 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > applied (with the commit message below) to tip/x86/debug for v2.6.27
> > merging, thanks Linus. Can i add your SOB too?
>
> Sure, add my S-O-B. But I hope/assuem that you also added my earlier
> patch
On Sun, 6 Jul 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> applied (with the commit message below) to tip/x86/debug for v2.6.27
> merging, thanks Linus. Can i add your SOB too?
Sure, add my S-O-B. But I hope/assuem that you also added my earlier patch
that added the support for '%pS' too? I'm not entirely su
* Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Still all happily untested, of course. And still with no actual
> > users converted.
>
> Ok, it's tested, and here's an example usage conversion.
>
> The diffstat pretty much says it all. It _does_ change the format of
> the stack trace entry a
On Sat, Jul 05, 2008 at 08:41:39PM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
>> Single letters are bad because it hurts readability and limits the
>> usefulness of the extension.
On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 9:52 PM, Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think you need a little warning noise that goes off in
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jul 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Still all happily untested, of course. And still with no actual users
converted.
Ok, it's tested, and here's an example usage conversion.
The diffstat pretty much says it all. It _does_ change the format of the
stack trace entr
On Fri, 4 Jul 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> Still all happily untested, of course. And still with no actual users
> converted.
Ok, it's tested, and here's an example usage conversion.
The diffstat pretty much says it all. It _does_ change the format of the
stack trace entry a bit, but I do
On Sat, Jul 05, 2008 at 08:41:39PM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
> Single letters are bad because it hurts readability and limits the
> usefulness of the extension.
I think you need a little warning noise that goes off in your head that
means "I might be overdesigning this". Linus' code is elegant
On Sat, 5 Jul 2008, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> So, and what do you do when you run out of alphanumeric characters?
Did you actually look at my patch?
It's not a single alnum character. It's an arbitrary sequence of alnum
characters. IOW, my patch allows
%p6N
or something like that fo
On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 7:56 PM, Linus Torvalds
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Jul 2008, Vegard Nossum wrote:
>> On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 1:33 PM, Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > How about %p{feature}?
>
> No.
>
> I _expressly_ chose '%p[alphanumeric]*' because it's basically
>
On Saturday 2008-07-05 19:56, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> >
>> > How about %p{feature}?
>
>No.
>
>I _expressly_ chose '%p[alphanumeric]*' because it's basically
>totally insane to have that in a *real* printk() string: the end result
>would be totally unreadable.
So, and what do you do when you ru
On Sat, 5 Jul 2008, Vegard Nossum wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 1:33 PM, Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Saturday 2008-07-05 00:01, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >>
> >>We don't know how much interest there would be in churning NIPQUAD from
> >>the net guys. Interestingly, there
On Saturday 2008-07-05 15:50, Vegard Nossum wrote:
>
>I think the most elegant solution would be a macro similar to the
>initcall macros, that adds the custom extensions to a table which is
>defined by a special linker section. This allows complete
>decentralization, but I don't think it's possibl
On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 3:24 PM, Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Saturday 2008-07-05 14:52, Vegard Nossum wrote:
>>> On Saturday 2008-07-05 00:01, Andrew Morton wrote:
We don't know how much interest there would be in churning NIPQUAD from
the net guys. Interestingly,
On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 1:33 PM, Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Saturday 2008-07-05 00:01, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>
>>We don't know how much interest there would be in churning NIPQUAD from
>>the net guys. Interestingly, there's also %C (wint_t) which is a
>>32-bit quantity. So we
On Saturday 2008-07-05 14:52, Vegard Nossum wrote:
>> On Saturday 2008-07-05 00:01, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>>
>>>We don't know how much interest there would be in churning NIPQUAD from
>>>the net guys. Interestingly, there's also %C (wint_t) which is a
>>>32-bit quantity. So we could just go and
On Saturday 05 July 2008 00:01, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > We also jump through hoops to print things like sector_t and
> > > resource_size_t. They always need to be cast to `unsiged long long',
> > > which generates additional stack space and text in some setups.
> >
> > The thing is that GCC ch
On Saturday 2008-07-05 00:01, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
>We don't know how much interest there would be in churning NIPQUAD from
>the net guys. Interestingly, there's also %C (wint_t) which is a
>32-bit quantity. So we could just go and say "%C prints an ipv4
>address" and be done with it. But the
On Fri, Jul 04, 2008 at 03:01:00PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> (heck, let's cc lkml - avoid having to go through all this again)
>
> It would be excellent if gcc had an extension system so that you could
> add new printf control chars and maybe even tell gcc how to check them.
> But of course, i
On Sat, 5 Jul 2008, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>
> I'll give it a try using probe_kernel_address() instead on monday.
Here's the updated patch which uses probe_kernel_address() instead (and
moves the whole #ifdef mess out of the code that wants it and into a
helper function - and maybe we
On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 13:02 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> That function descriptor indirection is totally untested, and I did it
> with a
>
> pagefault_disable();
> __get_user(..)
> pagefault_enable();
>
> thing because I thought it would be nice if printk() was alway
> u64 is easy to fix, and I don't know why we haven't. Just make it
> unsigned long long on all architectures.
Yup. Also, one of the major user of that is to print a struct resource,
which everybody does differently, so we may even look at doing a %pR
that does the nice start..end [attr]..
Ben.
(heck, let's cc lkml - avoid having to go through all this again)
On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 14:42:53 -0600 Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 04, 2008 at 01:27:16PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 13:02:05 -0700 (PDT) Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote
On Fri, Jul 04, 2008 at 01:27:16PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 13:02:05 -0700 (PDT) Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > > so I think we could easily just say that we extend %p in various ways:
> > >
> > > - %pS - print pointer as a symbol
> > >
> > > and leave t
On Fri, 4 Jul 2008, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> probe_kernel_address() should be usable here.
Right you are.
> > +static char *string(char *buf, char *end, char *s, int field_width, int
> > precision, int flags)
> > +{
> > + int len, i;
> > +
> > + if ((unsigned long)s < PAGE_SIZE)
> > +
On Fri, Jul 04, 2008 at 01:02:05PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Jul 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > so I think we could easily just say that we extend %p in various ways:
> >
> > - %pS - print pointer as a symbol
> >
> > and leave tons of room for future extensions for different
On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 13:02:05 -0700 (PDT) Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 4 Jul 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > so I think we could easily just say that we extend %p in various ways:
> >
> > - %pS - print pointer as a symbol
> >
> > and leave tons of room for futur
On Fri, 4 Jul 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> so I think we could easily just say that we extend %p in various ways:
>
> - %pS - print pointer as a symbol
>
> and leave tons of room for future extensions for different kinds of
> pointers.
So here's a totally untested example patch of this,
40 matches
Mail list logo
