Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 3 Apr 2023 21:18:20 +0900
From:   Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>
To:     Jaewon Kim <jaewon31.kim@samsung.com>
Cc:     "pmladek@suse.com" <pmladek@suse.com>,
        "senozhatsky@chromium.org" <senozhatsky@chromium.org>,
        "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "jaewon31.kim@gmail.com" <jaewon31.kim@gmail.com>,
        GyeongHwan Hong <gh21.hong@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] vsprintf: compile error on %09pK
Message-ID: <20230403121820.GD12892@google.com>
References: <CGME20230403104617epcms1p383bacbca705c0d7e4fffca6833050e42@epcms1p3>
 <20230403104617epcms1p383bacbca705c0d7e4fffca6833050e42@epcms1p3>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230403104617epcms1p383bacbca705c0d7e4fffca6833050e42@epcms1p3>
Precedence: bulk

On (23/04/03 19:46), Jaewon Kim wrote:
> I've just changed %09lx to %09pK on my driver code to hide the address, but I
> faced compiler error. The %9pK without 0 worked.
> 
> Is there restriction on %pK which does now allow %0 ? I've wondered whether I
> did wrong or it is a printk problem.

I don't think this is %pK limitation. %p should not take modification flags.
E.g. %3p doesn't make sense, we still should print the entire pointer.