[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdV4R9ngCiho0BuDkQ2K4ivVaDHs6pxkEdj2q=J=H0RXOA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2017 09:48:12 +0100
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Tobin C. Harding" <me@...in.cc>,
"kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
"Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.ws>,
"Roberts, William C" <william.c.roberts@...el.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Jordan Glover <Golden_Miller83@...tonmail.ch>, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Ian Campbell <ijc@...lion.org.uk>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <wilal.deacon@....com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Chris Fries <cfries@...gle.com>, Dave Weinstein <olorin@...gle.com>,
Daniel Micay <danielmicay@...il.com>, Djalal Harouni <tixxdz@...il.com>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>, Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V11 3/5] printk: hash addresses printed with %p
Hi Linus,
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 12:33 AM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 2:57 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
>> Lowest 3 is good enough for all natural types, up to long long.
>> We may still receive complaints from people who care about seeing if
>> a pointer is cacheline-aligned or not. Fixing that may need up to 7 bits, I'm
>> afraid, which is a bit too much to give up.
>
> I really think even the lowest three is a bit too much.
>
> Who really cares? If it's something that is particularly _about_
> alignment (ie an alignment trap), maybe just print out those bits
> separately.
If I'm not mistaken, some architectures don't generate alignment traps, but
just zero the LSBs.
> And for everything else? It's purely about getting used to it.
Yes, we will get used to it.
I agree that for debugging during development, we will just use %px and be
fine.
Storm in a glass of water, everybody will have forgotten by the time v4.16 is
released.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
