Re: [PATCH V2] mm: Standardize printing for pgtable entries

[Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>]

On 08/07/26 6:28 PM, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:
> On 7/8/26 14:43, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>> On 08/07/2026 12:27, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:
>>> On 7/8/26 13:22, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Not sure if it's worth doing something like this?:
>>>>
>>>> #define PTVAL_STR_MAX						\
>>>> 	(MAX(MAX(MAX(MAX(sizeof(pteval_t), sizeof(pmdval_t)), 	\
>>>> 	    	     sizeof(pudval_t)), 			\
>>>> 		 sizeof(p4dval_t)), 				\
>>>>     	     sizeof(pgdval_t)) + 1)
>>>>
>>>> Would probably save stack space for 32bit arches?
>>>
>>> Do we really care about that? This is about a corner cases error reporting right
>>> now.
>>
>> Fair enough, it just seemed like an obvious and simple (very minor) improvement.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think arm64 code also does pte printing, which you also need to fix up for
>>>> D128 support. Perhaps this could be moved to a header for reuse?
>>>
>>> We could do that as a second step, right?
>>
>> Sure, but why churn it twice? Anyway, no strong opinion, you're the boss :)
> 
> I'd say, if we're going to reuse this code for the arm64 pieces as well, we'd
> best send it along the arm64 pieces, and figure out where to place it for
> arm64's use right away.
> 
> If we'll defer the arm64 changes, I'd also defer deciding where we'd be moving
> it to.

Sounds better to have this printing problem taken care in generic
MM first as this change looks self contained. Subsequently rebase
D128 series as required.