Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 22 Mar 2022 13:16:54 +0900 | From | Sergey Senozhatsky <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 12/20] vsprintf: add new `%pA` format specifier |
| |
On (22/03/18 17:04), Petr Mladek wrote: > On Fri 2022-03-18 16:07:31, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 07:10:00PM +0100, Miguel Ojeda wrote: > > > From: Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net> > > > + case 'A': > > > + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RUST)) { > > > + WARN_ONCE(1, "Please remove %%pA from non-Rust code\n"); > > > + return error_string(buf, end, "(%pA?)", spec); > > > + } > > > > I'm wondering if the Big Scary Banner as trace_printk() does would be better > > (in case we can tell that %pA is used in the code when RUST=n). > > Good question! > > The advantage of WARN_ONCE() is that it shows the stack so that it is > easier to locate the caller. > > On the other hand, WARN_ONCE() is a bit misused here. It should be > used only in situations that might be potentially fatal. It might > even cause panic() with "panic_on_warn" kernel parameter.
Stack trace is certainly helpful here. So maybe dump_stack() instead of WARN_ONCE()? I guess I don't mind WARN_ONCE().
| |