[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210119161524.31c695d3@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 16:15:24 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Timur Tabi <timur@...nel.org>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, roman.fietze@...na.com,
John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] introduce DUMP_PREFIX_UNHASHED for hex dumps
On Tue, 19 Jan 2021 14:49:17 -0600
Timur Tabi <timur@...nel.org> wrote:
> On 1/19/21 2:10 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > I'm curious, what is the result if you replaced %p with %pS?
> >
> > That way you get a kallsyms offset version of the output, which could still
> > be very useful depending on what you are dumping.
>
> %pS versatile_init+0x0/0x110
>
> The address is question is often not related to any symbol, so it
> wouldn't make sense to use %pS.
When it's not related to any symbol, doesn't it still produce an offset
with something close by, that could still give you information that's
better than a hashed number.
>
> Maybe you meant %pK? I'm okay with that instead of %px.
If others are OK with that, perhaps that should be the compromise then?
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists