linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] ACPI: Add acpi_pr

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1343339854.17538.50.camel@joe2Laptop>
Date:	Thu, 26 Jul 2012 14:57:34 -0700
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
Cc:	Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@...com>, lenb@...nel.org,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com, liuj97@...il.com,
	srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, prarit@...hat.com,
	imammedo@...hat.com, vijaymohan.pandarathil@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] ACPI: Add acpi_pr_<level>() interfaces

On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 15:50 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 15:37 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> >>     PNP0C01:00: new device for \_SB_.PCI0.ISA_.MBIO
> >>
> >> I fiddled with this a while ago; it would look something like this:
> > []
> >> +static noinline_for_stack
> >> +char *acpi_name_string(char *buf, char *end, acpi_handle handle,
> >> +                    struct printf_spec spec, const char *fmt)
[]
> Yes.  I'm hesitant about this approach in general, because I don't
> think printing the ACPI path is something we should be doing often.
> It's not like a struct resource or a MAC address, where there are
> dozens or hundreds of users.  I really think we should only print ACPI
> paths in one or two places, so adding a %p extension would waste a
> letter and encourage the wrong behavior.

I don't much care for adding ACPI specific calls to vsprintf
as acpi is supposed to be OS generic anyway.

I don't think there's anything wrong with Toshi's approach.
Anyone that looks for speed in a logging message is looking
for an oddly fitting thing.  Tracing sure, but logging?

I also don't see anything wrong with renaming it to just
acpi_<level>, but that's a different discussion.

cheers, Joe

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/