On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 04:16:16PM -0700, Bill Wendling wrote:
On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 4:03 PM Jan Engelhardt jengelh@inai.de wrote:
On Friday 2022-06-10 00:49, Bill Wendling wrote:
On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 3:25 PM Andrew Morton akpm@linux-foundation.org wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jun 2022 22:16:19 +0000 Bill Wendling morbo@google.com wrote:
This patch set fixes some clang warnings when -Wformat is enabled.
tldr:
printk(msg);
printk("%s", msg);Otherwise these changes are a useless consumer of runtime resources.
Calling a "printf" style function is already insanely expensive. [...] The "printk" and similar functions all have the "__printf" attribute. I don't know of a modification to that attribute which can turn off this type of check.
Perhaps you can split vprintk_store in the middle (after the call to vsnprintf), and offer the second half as a function of its own (e.g. "puts"). Then the tldr could be
- printk(msg);
- puts(msg);
That might be a nice compromise. Andrew, what do you think?
You would need to do that for all of the dev_printk() variants, so I doubt that would ever be all that useful as almost no one should be using a "raw" printk() these days.
thanks,
greg k-h