linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] printf: Add print format (%pra) for struct range

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: <ZxX7cfx2kOssqR2H@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 09:57:53 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
	Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>,
	Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
	Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@...el.com>,
	Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
	Fan Ni <fan.ni@...sung.com>, Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] printf: Add print format (%pra) for struct range

On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 01:05:22PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> Ira Weiny wrote:

...

> > +	%pra    [range 0x0000000060000000]
> > +
> > +For printing struct range.  struct range holds an arbitrary range of u64
> > +values.  If start is equal to end only print the start value.
> 
> I was going to say "why this special case that does not exist for the
> %pr case?", but then checked the code and found it *does* do this for %pr.
> So if you're going to document this special case for %pra might as well
> update the documentation for %pr too.
> 
> Alternatively, drop the new %pra documentation for this corner case as
> accommodating the U64_MAX size range case is arguably a mistake in the
> caller.

You probably meant "...(U64_MAX + 1) size..." as we end up with the same value.
But yeah, I also noticed the same.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko