[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Yoei4RdwQ0u5HyPB@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 17:17:05 +0300
From: "andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com"
<andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...il.com>
Cc: David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mm@...r.kernel.org>,
"pmladek@...e.com" <pmladek@...e.com>,
"rostedt@...dmis.org" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"senozhatsky@...omium.org" <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
"willy@...radead.org" <willy@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/28] vsprintf: %pf(%p)
On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 12:49:24AM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 09:06:24PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
...
> > > The goal is to replace most of our %p format extensions with this
> > > interface, and to move pretty-printers out of the core vsprintf.c code -
> >
> > One advantage of the current scheme is that is reasonably safe
> > and easy to use.
> > Perhaps too many extra formats have been added recently.
> > This all seems like a recipe for disaster with functions being
> > called with the wrong number of parameters
> > (I can't think how you can compile-time check it).
>
> We can't check it at compile time yet, it's true - printf format checking will
> need to be extended. But we're already talking about doing that.
I have heard about GCC plugin, which also may check the %p extension usages.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists