Re: RFC: script to convert vsprintf uses of %pf to %ps and %pF to %pS

[Joe Perches]

On Mon, 2018-11-26 at 15:08 +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > There are approximately these total uses of the symbolic
> > lookup vsprintf extensions %p[SsFf]:
> > 
> > $ git grep '".*[^%]%p[SsFf]' | \
> >   grep -oh '%p[SsFf]' | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn
> >     231 %pS
> >      65 %ps
> >      60 %pf
> >      47 %pF
> 
> I didn't bother to remove "pf/pF" because I didn't want to count on:
>   a) everyone running checkpatch.pl
>   b) everyone testing all printk-s they added
> 
> I guess pf/pF still can sneak in.

Any use of %p<invalid_extension> could sneak in.

And thanks, the checkpatch test for %p<invalid_extensions>
should be updated too.

> But I don't have a really strong opinion on this. If general
> consensus is that we shall remove deprecated specifiers, then
> I'm fine.

I think converting deprecated things is generally good.

Also, the %p<extension> lettering space is limited, so
cleaning deprecated extensions is useful.

> After running this script I still have a bunch of leftovers:
> 
> //
> // these two are probably not really relevant, but still - %pF/%pf
> //
> tools/lib/traceevent/event-parse.c:             if (asprintf(&format, "%%pf: (NO FORMAT FOUND at %llx)\n", addr) < 0)
> tools/lib/traceevent/event-parse.c:     if (asprintf(&format, "%s: %s", "%pf", printk->printk) < 0)

I was not/am not sure about those.

> arch/um/kernel/sysrq.c: pr_info(" [<%08lx>] %s%pF\n", address, reliable ? "" : "? ",
> arch/x86/xen/multicalls.c:                              printk(KERN_DEBUG "  call %2d/%d: op=%lu arg=[%lx] result=%ld\t%pF\n",
> kernel/async.c:         pr_debug("calling  %lli_%pF @ %i\n",
> kernel/async.c:         pr_debug("initcall %lli_%pF returned 0 after %lld usecs\n",

Missed those by using \b, thanks again.