Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753899AbcLFQLN (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Dec 2016 11:11:13 -0500 Received: from mail-wj0-f181.google.com ([209.85.210.181]:33070 "EHLO mail-wj0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753699AbcLFQLK (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Dec 2016 11:11:10 -0500 Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 17:11:16 +0100 From: Christoffer Dall To: Maninder Singh Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, marc.zyngier@arm.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, rkrcmar@redhat.com, cmetcalf@mellanox.com, panand@redhat.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, james.morse@arm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, sandeepa.s.prabhu@gmail.com, labbott@redhat.com, shijie.huang@arm.com, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org, wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org, pankaj.m@samsung.com, ajeet.y@samsung.com, cpgs@samsung.com, Vaneet Narang Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] arm64: Correcting format specifier for printing 64 bit addresses Message-ID: <20161206161116.GD4816@cbox> References: <1480925393-8386-1-git-send-email-maninder1.s@samsung.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1480925393-8386-1-git-send-email-maninder1.s@samsung.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3478 Lines: 91 On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 01:39:53PM +0530, Maninder Singh wrote: > This patch corrects format specifier for printing 64 bit addresses. > > Signed-off-by: Maninder Singh > Signed-off-by: Vaneet Narang > --- > arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c | 2 +- > arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c | 8 ++++++-- > arch/arm64/mm/fault.c | 15 ++++++++++----- > arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c | 4 ++-- > 4 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c > index c7b6de6..c89d5fd 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c > @@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ asmlinkage long sys_rt_sigreturn(struct pt_regs *regs) > > badframe: > if (show_unhandled_signals) > - pr_info_ratelimited("%s[%d]: bad frame in %s: pc=%08llx sp=%08llx\n", > + pr_info_ratelimited("%s[%d]: bad frame in %s: pc=%016llx sp=%016llx\n", > current->comm, task_pid_nr(current), __func__, > regs->pc, regs->sp); > force_sig(SIGSEGV, current); > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c > index 87e7e66..89bf5c1 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c > @@ -1554,8 +1554,12 @@ static void unhandled_cp_access(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, > WARN_ON(1); > } > > - kvm_err("Unsupported guest CP%d access at: %08lx\n", > - cp, *vcpu_pc(vcpu)); > + if (params->is_32bit) > + kvm_err("Unsupported guest CP%d access at: %08lx\n", > + cp, *vcpu_pc(vcpu)); > + else > + kvm_err("Unsupported guest CP%d access at: %016lx\n", > + cp, *vcpu_pc(vcpu)); It feels a bit much to me to have an if-statement to differentiate the number of leading zeros, so if it's important to always have fixed widths then I would just use %016lx in both cases. > print_sys_reg_instr(params); > kvm_inject_undefined(vcpu); > } > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c b/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c > index a78a5c4..d96a42a 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c > @@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ void show_pte(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr) > > pr_alert("pgd = %p\n", mm->pgd); > pgd = pgd_offset(mm, addr); > - pr_alert("[%08lx] *pgd=%016llx", addr, pgd_val(*pgd)); > + pr_alert("[%016lx] *pgd=%016llx", addr, pgd_val(*pgd)); > > do { > pud_t *pud; > @@ -177,7 +177,7 @@ static void __do_kernel_fault(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr, > * No handler, we'll have to terminate things with extreme prejudice. > */ > bust_spinlocks(1); > - pr_alert("Unable to handle kernel %s at virtual address %08lx\n", > + pr_alert("Unable to handle kernel %s at virtual address %016lx\n", > (addr < PAGE_SIZE) ? "NULL pointer dereference" : > "paging request", addr); > > @@ -198,9 +198,14 @@ static void __do_user_fault(struct task_struct *tsk, unsigned long addr, > struct siginfo si; > > if (unhandled_signal(tsk, sig) && show_unhandled_signals_ratelimited()) { > - pr_info("%s[%d]: unhandled %s (%d) at 0x%08lx, esr 0x%03x\n", > - tsk->comm, task_pid_nr(tsk), fault_name(esr), sig, > - addr, esr); > + if (compat_user_mode(regs)) > + pr_info("%s[%d]: unhandled %s (%d) at 0x%08lx, esr 0x%03x\n", > + tsk->comm, task_pid_nr(tsk), fault_name(esr), sig, > + addr, esr); > + else > + pr_info("%s[%d]: unhandled %s (%d) at 0x%016lx, esr 0x%03x\n", > + tsk->comm, task_pid_nr(tsk), fault_name(esr), sig, > + addr, esr); same here. Thanks, -Christoffer