On Tue, 14 May 2019 21:13:06 +0200 Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Do we care about the value? "(-E%u)"? > > > > That too could be confusing. What would (-E22) be considered by a user > > doing an sprintf() on some string. I know that would confuse me, or I > > would think that it was what the %pX displayed, and wonder why it > > displayed it that way. Whereas "(fault)" is quite obvious for any %p > > use case. > > I would immediately understand there's a missing IS_ERR() check in a > function that can return -EINVAL, without having to add a new printk() > to find out what kind of bogus value has been received, and without > having to reboot, and trying to reproduce... Hi Geert, I have to ask. Has there actually been a case that you used a %pX and it faulted, and you had to go back to find what the value of the failure was? IMO, sprintf() should not be a tool to do this, because then people will not add their IS_ERR() and just let sprintf() do the job for them. I don't think that would be wise to allow. -- Steve
