On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 02:04:38PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 15.07.24 21:21, Peter Xu wrote: > > Currently the dax fault handler dumps the vma range when dynamic debugging > > enabled. That's mostly not useful. Dump the (aligned) address instead > > with the order info. > > > > Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/dax/device.c | 6 +++--- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/dax/device.c b/drivers/dax/device.c > > index eb61598247a9..714174844ca5 100644 > > --- a/drivers/dax/device.c > > +++ b/drivers/dax/device.c > > @@ -235,9 +235,9 @@ static vm_fault_t dev_dax_huge_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf, unsigned int order) > > int id; > > struct dev_dax *dev_dax = filp->private_data; > > - dev_dbg(&dev_dax->dev, "%s: %s (%#lx - %#lx) order:%d\n", current->comm, > > - (vmf->flags & FAULT_FLAG_WRITE) ? "write" : "read", > > - vmf->vma->vm_start, vmf->vma->vm_end, order); > > + dev_dbg(&dev_dax->dev, "%s: op=%s addr=%#lx order=%d\n", current->comm, > > + (vmf->flags & FAULT_FLAG_WRITE) ? "write" : "read", > > + vmf->address & ~((1UL << (order + PAGE_SHIFT)) - 1), order); > > id = dax_read_lock(); > > if (order == 0) > > Agreed, the address of the fault is better. Just wondering, would the > unmasked address be even better? Using the order we can figure out the > to-be-aligned address.
