On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 8:35 AM Florent Revest <revest@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I was having a stroll through lib/vsprintf.c and noticed bstr_printf: > > > > * This function like C99 vsnprintf, but the difference is that vsnprintf gets > > * arguments from stack, and bstr_printf gets arguments from @bin_buf which is > > * a binary buffer that generated by vbin_printf. > > > > Maybe it would be easier to just build our argument buffer similarly > > to what vbin_printf does. > > I've been experimenting with this idea and it is quite promising :) it > also makes the code much cleaner, I find. I'll send a series asap. You mean to use bstr_printf internally ? That could work indeed. Make sure CONFIG_BINARY_PRINTF is selected. CONFIG_TRACING does it already. > BPF maintainers: should we fix forward or do you prefer reverting the > snprintf series and then re-applying another snprintf series without > the regression in bpf_trace_printk that mangles some argument types ? > (bpf_seq_printf has always been like that so no regression there) Pls send it as a follow up. Along with another patch to clean verifier bits we discussed. The merge window is approaching, so it has to be done asap.
