[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87iovdqaif.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 15:57:12 +0900
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Hyeoncheol Lee <cheol.lee@....com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"zhangwei\(Jovi\)" <jovi.zhangwei@...wei.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
Hemant Kumar <hkshaw@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/17] tracing/probes: Fix basic print type functions
Hi Masami,
On Thu, 28 Nov 2013 13:16:09 +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> (2013/11/27 23:39), Namhyung Kim wrote:
>> Hi Masami,
>>
>> 2013-11-27 (수), 20:57 +0900, Masami Hiramatsu:
>>> (2013/11/27 15:19), Namhyung Kim wrote:
>>>>
>>>> -DEFINE_BASIC_PRINT_TYPE_FUNC(u8, "%x", unsigned int)
>>>> -DEFINE_BASIC_PRINT_TYPE_FUNC(u16, "%x", unsigned int)
>>>> -DEFINE_BASIC_PRINT_TYPE_FUNC(u32, "%lx", unsigned long)
>>>> -DEFINE_BASIC_PRINT_TYPE_FUNC(u64, "%llx", unsigned long long)
>>>> -DEFINE_BASIC_PRINT_TYPE_FUNC(s8, "%d", int)
>>>> -DEFINE_BASIC_PRINT_TYPE_FUNC(s16, "%d", int)
>>>> -DEFINE_BASIC_PRINT_TYPE_FUNC(s32, "%ld", long)
>>>> -DEFINE_BASIC_PRINT_TYPE_FUNC(s64, "%lld", long long)
>>>> +DEFINE_BASIC_PRINT_TYPE_FUNC(u8 , "%#x")
>>>> +DEFINE_BASIC_PRINT_TYPE_FUNC(u16, "%#x")
>>>> +DEFINE_BASIC_PRINT_TYPE_FUNC(u32, "%#x")
>>>> +DEFINE_BASIC_PRINT_TYPE_FUNC(u64, "%#Lx")
>>>
>>> As I said I'd like to ask you to change it in %x.
>>>
>>> I just checked in Fedora18, but %#x is not supported on this glibc-2.17.
>>> Since this format is exported via debugfs (format file), I think %x is
>>> better.
>>
>> Hmm.. but in most cases it's used for printf() not scanf(), right? In
>> that case adding 0x prefix will help human readers a lot.
>>
>> How about mandating the prefix with "0x%x"? This way it can be used
>> both for printf() and scanf() IMHO.
>
> Agreed, you can just use "0x%x" in above case instead of "%#x". :)
Okay, will change.
> For other traceevents, from the human readability point of view,
> I think we should move all the event format should use 0x%x instead
> of %x, because sometimes it confuse users (e.g. 100 => 0x64, without 0x,
> it is just "64").
Agreed. I'll take a look at them later.
Thanks,
Namhyung
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists