On Thu, 2020-04-30 at 03:03 -0700, Alan Maguire wrote: > On Mon, 20 Apr 2020, Joe Perches wrote: > > Here as well the individual field types don't contain > > enough information to determine if a field should be > > output as %x or %u. > Right, we could add some more format modifiers for cases > like that I guess. Currently the display formats used are > - numbers are represented as decimal > - bitfields are represented in hex > - pointers are obfuscated unless the 'x' option is used > - char arrays are printed as chars if printable, > [ 'l', 'i', 'k', 'e', ' ', 't', 'h', 'i', 's' ] > > I'd be happy to add more format specifiers to control > these options, or tweak the defaults if needed. A > "print numbers in hex" option seems worthwhile perhaps? Or maybe add and use new typedefs like x8,x16,x32,x64 to the bpf struct definitions where u8,u16,u32,u64 are %u and x8,x16,x32,x64 are %x
