From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Randy Dunlap Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, efi: print debug values in Kib not MB Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 10:10:24 -0700 Message-ID: <53D92700.3040803@infradead.org> References: <1406653761-3884-1-git-send-email-prarit@redhat.com> <20140729222932.GA17481@pd.tnic> <20140730144803.GB15082@console-pimps.org> <53D909C3.9050205@canonical.com> <53D9259F.5050307@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <53D9259F.5050307@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Prarit Bhargava , Matt Fleming Cc: Colin Ian King , Borislav Petkov , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lszubowi@redhat.com, Matt Fleming , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , x86@kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org On 07/30/14 10:04, Prarit Bhargava wrote: > > > On 07/30/2014 11:05 AM, Colin Ian King wrote: >> On 30/07/14 15:48, Matt Fleming wrote: >>> On Wed, 30 Jul, at 12:29:32AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: >>>> On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 01:09:21PM -0400, Prarit Bhargava wrote: >>>>> The current debug print in EFI does >>>>> >>>>> [ 0.000000] efi: mem84: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x00000000645b5000-0x00000000645fb000) (0MB) >>>>> >>>>> and rounds off the size to 0MB and isn't very useful. We should print this in >>>>> Kib. After applying this patch we get better info with >>>>> >>>>> [ 0.000000] efi: mem84: type=3, attr=0xf, range=[0x00000000645b5000-0x00000000645fb000) (280kiB) >>>> >>>> Turning this into kiB unconditionally won't always work ok: >>>> >>>> First of all, there might be something which parses that output so I'd >>>> make sure I'm not breaking that. Maybe fwts... Matt will know. >>> >>> I'm not aware of anything that parses the dmesg output, but I'm >>> including Colin in case he has any insight. >>> >> That won't break fwts. > > Matt -- could you make a decision on whether or not this should be strictly in > KiB or if it should be a rolling KiB, Mib, and GiB? > > My issue is simply that I'd like to know *exactly* how big each range is and not > have it rounded off. Others think that it is easier to read Mib & Gib ... It is easier to read in MiB or GiB IMHO, but since it is debug info, exact is good. It would be even better [more readable] to use commas (or periods/dots) to separate it into groups of 3 digits. -- ~Randy