On (08/28/19 14:49), Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> On 28/08/2019 14.02, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > On (08/28/19 14:54), Jani Nikula wrote:
> > [..]
> >>> I personally think that this feature is not worth the code, data,
> >>> and bikeshedding.
> >>
> >> The obvious alternative, I think already mentioned, is to just add
> >> strerror() or similar as a function. I doubt there'd be much opposition
> >> to that. Folks could use %s and strerr(ret). And a follow-up could add
> >> the special format specifier if needed.
> >
> > Yeah, I'd say that strerror() would be a better alternative
> > to vsprintf() specifier. (if we decide to add such functionality).
>
> Please no. The .text footprint of the changes at the call sites to do
> pr_err("...%s...", errcode(err)) instead of the current
> pr_err("...%d...", err) would very soon dwarf whatever is necessary to
> implement %pE or %dE.
New vsprintf() specifiers have some downsides as well. Should %dE
accidentally (via backport) make it to the -stable kernel, which
does not support %dE, and we are going to lose the actual error
code value as well.
-ss
