On Mon, May 29, 2023 at 05:27:29PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote: > On Sun 2023-05-28 17:01:59, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote: > > The code mostly looks fine and the patch makes sense to me. > > But I'm not sure if it's a nice behavior to print garbage when it does not > > have a page type, although I can hardly imagine users of this flag other > > than __dump_page(). I'd rather keep printk part unchanged and add > > page_has_type() check in __dump_page(). > > I agree with Hyeonggon. The change in __dump_page() makes sense. > But vsprintf() should stay clever and do not print garbage. The caller (and, let's face it, there's only ever going to be one caller) shouldn't pass garbage in the first place.
