Re: [PATCH] x86: tidy e820 output

Yinghai Lu
2010-09-22T21:31:07Z

On 09/22/2010 02:22 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 22, 2010 03:07:00 pm Yinghai Lu wrote:
>> On 09/22/2010 12:11 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>
>>> -static void __init e820_print_type(u32 type)
>>> +static char * __init e820_type_name(u32 type)
>>> {
>>> switch (type) {
>>> case E820_RAM:
>>> case E820_RESERVED_KERN:
>>> - printk(KERN_CONT "(usable)");
>>> - break;
>>> + return "usable";
>>> case E820_RESERVED:
>>> - printk(KERN_CONT "(reserved)");
>>> - break;
>>> + return "reserved";
>>> case E820_ACPI:
>>> - printk(KERN_CONT "(ACPI data)");
>>> - break;
>>> + return "ACPI data";
>>> case E820_NVS:
>>> - printk(KERN_CONT "(ACPI NVS)");
>>> - break;
>>> + return "ACPI NVS";
>>> case E820_UNUSABLE:
>>> - printk(KERN_CONT "(unusable)");
>>> - break;
>>> - default:
>>> - printk(KERN_CONT "type %u", type);
>>> - break;
>>> + return "unusable";
>>> }
>>> + return "(unknown)";
>>> }
>>
>> type value?
>
> I decided the code simplification was worth skipping the type.
> I'd certainly rather have the type value, too, but I don't know
> how much hassle to go through to debug a firmware problem. How
> important do you think it is?

I have some systems with "type 9".

Yinghai