On Tue, 9 Jul 2024 18:31:54 +0200
Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jul 2024 14:57:00 +0200
> Christoph Schlameuss <schlameuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
[...]
> > +static inline void print_hex_bytes(const char *name, u64 page, size_t len)
>
> "page" is not an appropriate name, it's just an address, right? "addr"
> seems a more appropriate name
>
Yes, this is a address. I guess I just carried the name forward from
when I really printed out a whole page...
Will change this to addr.
> > +{
> > + pr_debug("%s (%p)\t\t8-0x08 12-0x0c 16-0x10 20-0x14 24-0x18 28-0x1c",
> > + name, (void *)page);
> > + for (u8 pp_row = 0; pp_row < (len / 32); pp_row++) {
> > + pr_debug("\n %3d 0x%.3x ", pp_row * 32, pp_row * 32);
> > + for (u8 pp_block = 0; pp_block < 8; pp_block++)
> > + pr_debug(" %8x", *(((u32 *)page) + 8 * pp_row + pp_block));
>
> why not printing in blocks of 64 bits?
>
Nothing against 64 bit blocks. Adjusting that for the next version and
also optimizing the functions to allow more reuse.
[...]
