On 08.08.2019 10:33, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 08/08/2019 05:50, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> On 07.08.19 20:11, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>> Its not exactly the easiest to dump to follow.
>>>
>>> First of all - I don't see why the hold/block time are printed like
>>> that.  It
>>> might be a holdover from the 32bit build, pre PRId64 support.  They
>>> should
>>> probably use PRI_stime anyway.
>>
>> Fine with me.
>>
>>> The domid rendering is unfortunate.  Ideally we'd use %pd but that would
>>> involve rearranging the logic to get a struct domain* in hand.
>>> Seeing as
>>> you're the last person to modify this code, how hard would that be to
>>> do?
>>
>> It would completely break the struct type agnostic design.
> 
> Ok.  As an alternatively, how about %pdr which takes a raw domid?  It
> would be a trivial adjustment in the vsnprintf code, and could plausibly
> be useful elsewhere where we have a domid and not a domain pointer.

At the risk of upsetting / annoying you: A domid_t would again
better be formatted via %od (and without the need to take the
address of a respective variable). In the case here it would
have the minor additional benefit of conserving on format string
length.

Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Reply via email to