Re: RFC: introduce struct ksymbol

[Joe Perches]

On Wed, 2009-04-15 at 20:21 +0930, Rusty Russell wrote: 
> On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 03:28:39 pm Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Why not 'struct ksym'? That name is unused right now, it is shorter 
> > and just as descriptive.
> > 
> > Regarding the change... dunno. Sam, Rusty - what do you think?
> 
> Yes, ksym is nice.  But agree with you that it's marginal obfuscation
> to wrap it in a struct.
> 
> The current symbol printing APIs are awful; we should address them first
> (like the %pF patch does) IMHO.

I suggest just %pS<type>

With %pS, struct ksym is probably not all that
useful unless it's for something like a sscanf.

Today there are these symbol uses:
name, offset, size, modname

So perhaps %pS<foo> where foo is any combination of:

n name
o offset
s size
m modname
a all

and if not specified is a name lookup ("%pSn").


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