[RFC V2 01/14] mm: Abstract printing of pxd_val()

[Dave Hansen]

On 5/12/26 21:45, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>  	if (!p4d_present(p4d) || p4d_leaf(p4d)) {
> -		pr_alert("pgd:%08llx p4d:%08llx\n", pgdv, p4dv);
> +		pr_alert("pgd:%" __PRIpxx " p4d:%" __PRIpxx "\n",
> +			 __PRIpxx_args(pgdv), __PRIpxx_args(p4dv));
>  		return;
>  	}

That's not the most readable result. Could a printk() format specifier
make this nicer? Maybe use "%pT"?

	pr_alert("pgd:%pT p4d:%pT\n", &pgd, &p4d);

I _think_ it could even get rid of the p??v variables.