On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 2:17 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
<geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> if (cachep->flags & SLAB_STORE_USER) {
> - pr_err("Last user: [<%p>](%pSR)\n",
> + pr_err("Last user: [<%px>](%pSR)\n",
> *dbg_userword(cachep, objp),
> *dbg_userword(cachep, objp));
Is there actually any point to the %px at all?
Why not remove it? the _real_ information is printed out by %pSR, and
that's both sufficient and useful in ways %px isn't.
> - pr_err("Slab corruption (%s): %s start=%p, len=%d\n",
> + pr_err("Slab corruption (%s): %s start=%px, len=%d\n",
> print_tainted(), cachep->name,
> realobj, size);
and here, is the pointer actually interesting, or should we just give
the offset to the allocation?
But if the pointer is interesting, then ack.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
