From: Joe Perches > Sent: 15 August 2020 00:52 ... > > This is why I think any discussion that says "people should buffer > > their lines themselves and we should get rid if pr_cont()" is > > fundamentally broken. > > > > Don't go down that hole. I won't take it. It's wrong. > > I don't think it's wrong per se. > > It's reasonable to avoid pr_cont when appropriate. > > Trivial buffering, or adding and using YA vsprintf > extension can avoid unnecessary message interleaving. > > For instance, I just sent this patch to allow removal > of print_vma_addr and its use of pr_cont. > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/09f11651f0e913e159b955ac447cd8cadf36cb0d.camel@xxxxxxxxxxx/ ISTM that is a bit complex for a printf format. Even with the 'noinline_for_stack' it is going to use a lot of stack - and error printfs are already likely to be near the stack limit. The recursion for %pV might also cause grief. In that case formatting the data into an on-stack char[] before the printf is probably the simplest solution. David - Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK Registration No: 1397386 (Wales) _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
