Re: [RFC v3 11/19] kunit: add Python libraries for handing KUnit config and kernel

On Tue, 11 Dec 2018 15:09:26 +0100 Petr Mladek <pmladek(a)suse.com&gt; wrote: >> We have liburcu already, which is good. The main sticking points are: >> >> - printk has started adding a lot of %pX enhancements which printf >> obviously doesn't know about. > I wonder how big problem it is and if it is worth using another > approach. No, please do not change the %pX approach. > An alternative would be to replace them with helper functions > the would produce the same string. The meaning would be easier > to understand. But concatenating with the surrounding text > would be less elegant. People might start using pr_cont() > that is problematic (mixed lines). > > Also the %pX formats are mostly used to print context of some > structures. Even the helper functions would need some maintenance > to keep them compatible. > > BTW: The printk() feature has been introduced 10 years ago by > the commit 4d8a743cdd2690c0bc8 ("vsprintf: add infrastructure > support for extended '%p' specifiers"). trace-cmd and perf know about most of the %pX data and how to read it. Perhaps we can extend the libtraceevent library to export a generic way to read data from printk() output for other tools to use.