From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [18.85.46.34]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A850DDF4E for ; Sun, 27 Jul 2008 15:40:37 +1000 (EST) Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: Use new printk extension %pS to print symbols on oops From: David Woodhouse To: Linus Torvalds In-Reply-To: References: <20080707034436.BEA2DDDF35@ozlabs.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2008 01:40:30 -0400 Message-Id: <1217137231.1769.33.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 10:08 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, 7 Jul 2008, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > > This changes the oops and backtrace code to use the new %pS > > printk extension to print out symbols rather than manually > > calling print_symbol. > > Ok, I ended up committing the suppor for '%pS' early (as a series of > smaller patches to make it clearer), just because it makes it easier for > different people to start converthing things with the infrastructure in > place. Out of interest, why is it %pS and not %Sp? Shouldn't the modifier come first? What if we want to print a pointer immediately followed by a capital S? -- David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre David.Woodhouse@intel.com Intel Corporation