On Thu 2024-08-22 12:53:32, Ira Weiny wrote:
> Petr Mladek wrote:
> > On Fri 2024-08-16 09:44:10, Ira Weiny wrote:
> > > The use of struct range in the CXL subsystem is growing. In particular,
> > > the addition of Dynamic Capacity devices uses struct range in a number
> > > of places which are reported in debug and error messages.
> > >
> > > To wit requiring the printing of the start/end fields in each print
> > > became cumbersome. Dan Williams mentions in [1] that it might be time
> > > to have a print specifier for struct range similar to struct resource
> > >
> > > A few alternatives were considered including '%pn' for 'print raNge' but
> > > %par follows that struct range is most often used to store a range of
> > > physical addresses. So use '%par' for 'print address range'.
> > >
> > > diff --git a/lib/vsprintf.c b/lib/vsprintf.c
> > > index 2d71b1115916..c132178fac07 100644
> > > --- a/lib/vsprintf.c
> > > +++ b/lib/vsprintf.c
> > > @@ -1140,6 +1140,39 @@ char *resource_string(char *buf, char *end, struct resource *res,
> > > return string_nocheck(buf, end, sym, spec);
> > > }
> > >
> > > +static noinline_for_stack
> > > +char *range_string(char *buf, char *end, const struct range *range,
> > > + struct printf_spec spec, const char *fmt)
> > > +{
> > > +#define RANGE_PRINTK_SIZE 16
> > > +#define RANGE_DECODED_BUF_SIZE ((2 * sizeof(struct range)) + 4)
> > > +#define RANGE_PRINT_BUF_SIZE sizeof("[range - ]")
[...]
> > > + static const struct printf_spec range_spec = {
> > > + .base = 16,
> > > + .field_width = RANGE_PRINTK_SIZE,
>
> However, my testing indicates this needs to be.
>
> .field_width = 18, /* 2 (0x) + 2 * 8 (bytes) */
Makes sense. Great catch!
> ... to properly zero pad the value. Does that make sense?
>
> > > + .precision = -1,
> > > + .flags = SPECIAL | SMALL | ZEROPAD,
> > > + };
> > > +
> > > + *p++ = '[';
> > > + p = string_nocheck(p, pend, "range ", str_spec);
> > > + p = number(p, pend, range->start, range_spec);
> > > + *p++ = '-';
> > > + p = number(p, pend, range->end, range_spec);
> > > + *p++ = ']';
> > > + *p = '\0';
Best Regards,
Petr
