linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] softirq: Print the function name

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <87v7hbss1p.ffs@tglx>
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2026 22:39:14 +0100
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...nel.org>
To: "enlin.mu" <enlin.mu@...ux.dev>, bigeasy@...utronix.de,
 boqun.feng@...il.com, mingo@...nel.org, ryotkkr98@...il.com,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, enlin.mu@...soc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] softirq: Print the function name

On Tue, Jan 06 2026 at 14:16, enlin.mu wrote:
> On 2026/1/5 17:41, Enlin Mu wrote:
>> Adjust the printing format from the function address to
>> the function name.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Enlin Mu <enlin.mu@...soc.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Enlin Mu <enlin.mu@...ux.dev>
>> ---
>>   kernel/softirq.c | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/kernel/softirq.c b/kernel/softirq.c
>> index 77198911b8dd..68ef18616fb9 100644
>> --- a/kernel/softirq.c
>> +++ b/kernel/softirq.c
>> @@ -622,7 +622,7 @@ static void handle_softirqs(bool ksirqd)
>>   		h->action();
>>   		trace_softirq_exit(vec_nr);
>>   		if (unlikely(prev_count != preempt_count())) {
>> -			pr_err("huh, entered softirq %u %s %p with preempt_count %08x, exited with %08x?\n",
>> +			pr_err("huh, entered softirq %u %s %pS with preempt_count %08x, exited with %08x?\n",
>>   			       vec_nr, softirq_to_name[vec_nr], h->action,
>>   			       prev_count, preempt_count());
>
> Hi All
>
> My test results are as follows:
>
> before this patch:
>
> [   49.919574] softirq: huh, entered softirq 1 TIMER 00000000bb45ef3a 
> with preempt_count 00000101, exited with 00000101?
>
>
> after this patch:
>
> [   49.919570] softirq: huh, entered softirq 1 TIMER 
> run_timer_softirq+0x0/0x108 with preempt_count 00000101, exited with 
> 00000102?

The TIMER softirq always invoked run_timer_softirq(). If that happens
then the interesting question is not the softirq action handler, but any
function it invoked from there. So there is _zero_ value of adding this.

Thanks,

        tglx