[PATCH v2] cifs: call print_hex_dump instead of custom implementation

[Jeff Layton]

On Mon, 12 May 2014 19:15:09 +0300
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko at linux.intel.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 2014-05-12 at 11:42 -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > On Mon, 12 May 2014 18:15:20 +0300
> > Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko at linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > This patch converts custom dumper to use native print_hex_dump() instead. The
> > > dump will have a given label and addresses per each line which differs it from
> > > the original code.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko at linux.intel.com>
> > > ---
> > >  fs/cifs/cifs_debug.c | 21 ++-------------------
> > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/fs/cifs/cifs_debug.c b/fs/cifs/cifs_debug.c
> > > index fa78b68..e7b87ce 100644
> > > --- a/fs/cifs/cifs_debug.c
> > > +++ b/fs/cifs/cifs_debug.c
> > > @@ -34,27 +34,10 @@
> > >  void
> > >  cifs_dump_mem(char *label, void *data, int length)
> > >  {
> > > -	int i, j;
> > > -	int *intptr = data;
> > > -	char *charptr = data;
> > > -	char buf[10], line[80];
> > > -
> > >  	printk(KERN_DEBUG "%s: dump of %d bytes of data at 0x%p\n",
> > >  		label, length, data);
> > > -	for (i = 0; i < length; i += 16) {
> > > -		line[0] = 0;
> > > -		for (j = 0; (j < 4) && (i + j * 4 < length); j++) {
> > > -			sprintf(buf, " %08x", intptr[i / 4 + j]);
> > > -			strcat(line, buf);
> > > -		}
> > > -		buf[0] = ' ';
> > > -		buf[2] = 0;
> > > -		for (j = 0; (j < 16) && (i + j < length); j++) {
> > > -			buf[1] = isprint(charptr[i + j]) ? charptr[i + j] : '.';
> > > -			strcat(line, buf);
> > > -		}
> > > -		printk(KERN_DEBUG "%s\n", line);
> > > -	}
> > > +	print_hex_dump(KERN_DEBUG, label, DUMP_PREFIX_ADDRESS, 16, 4,
> > > +		       data, length, true);
> > 
> > I'm not sure we want "label" as the prefix_str as it'll go on every
> > line. Maybe just use "" in place of "label" there?
> 
> It was in my initial v1. I thought it would be better to have.

Most of the labels are stuff like "Bad SMB:" and I'm not sure there's a
lot of value in repeating that on every line. The existing code
certainly doesn't and that sort of thing tends to clutter up logfiles.

> What about addresses? Would you like to see it or offset is enough, or
> drop them as well?
> 

The addresses aren't terribly helpful in general, and printing them
might be considered information leakage. I'd suggest going with just
the offsets.

> Moreover, I found another place where similar change could be done
> (dump_smb), so, would it be better to do in separate patch?
> 

Sure, that certainly wouldn't hurt. Your call on whether to do two
patches or one.


> > 
> > >  }
> > >  
> > >  #ifdef CONFIG_CIFS_DEBUG
> > 
> > Otherwise, this looks good.
> > 
> > Acked-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton at poochiereds.net>
> 
> 

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton at poochiereds.net>