Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] kallsyms: Document why unresolved symbols are revealed

[Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>]

On Tue, 1 Sep 2026 10:01:42 +0200
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> wrote:

> >  [    1.498171]  <TASK>
> >  [    1.498172]  h0000000cb9bc262
> >  [    1.498174]  ? h0000000eb5021dd
> >  [    1.498176]  h0000000ed1a9938
> >  [    1.498178]  </TASK>
> > 
> > But 'h' is not a valid number number so it might confuse parsers as
> > well. And it is not that user friedly either.
> > 
> > So, I still like more Steven's variant with [hash].  
> 
> While it does make sense to add [hash] to make it obvious it breaks
> formatting for some of the %p users where %p is expected to have a fixed
> length depending on 32/64 bit. Here, it is a %pS so adding extra it
> wouldn't break anything but I don't think it should be different between
> %p and %pS assuming we do print the hash instead 'unknown'.

Since the hash value is usually less than a normal pointer length, we could
have it be:

  h:XXXXXX on 32bit and h:XXXXXXXXXXXXXX on 64 bit, where it will not take
  up more than the size expected.

 [    1.498171]  <TASK>
 [    1.498172]  h:000000cb9bc262
 [    1.498174]  ? h:000000eb5021dd
 [    1.498176]  h:000000ed1a9938
 [    1.498178]  </TASK>

-- Steve