Linus Torvalds wrote:
quoted text
> 
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2008, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> Any reason we can't just re-define %p to print the 0x prefix, just as glibc
>> does?  It'd be easy enough to go and sed out all the 0x%p's currently in the
>> kernel.
> 
> You didn't listen. I want #p to do the _symbolic_ address. The thing we 
> have in the backtraces etc. With nice symbol offset information etc.
> 
> The '0x<hex>' thing isn't all that interesting. You can do it by adding 
> the '0x' by hand, or by using a cast and using %#lx instead.
> 

You're right, I didn't.  I still think the 0x%p's and -- even worse -- 
0x%08lx's (what about 64 bits?!) we currently have *all over the kernel* 
suck, but yes, that's a minor problem and getting the symbolic info 
would be a very nice thing.

It looks like gcc will warn about just about ever modifier to %p.  I 
wondered whose diseased brain came up with that idea.

Overall, I think the glibc people have botched their printf extensions 
horribly, failing to pick up the very useful %I extension from Windows 
and instead using %I for something completely conflicting is 
particularly pissy.

	-hpa

--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/