Re: [PATCH v2] declance: Fix 64-bit compilation warnings

From: Joe Perches
Date: Sat Jul 05 2014 - 14:09:29 EST


On Sat, 2014-07-05 at 18:39 +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Jul 2014, Joe Perches wrote:
>
> > > One question though, does either of you or anybody else know why we're
> > > inconsistent about this 0x prefixing of virtual addresses vs physical
> > > addresses? Specifically %p vs e.g. %pad.
> >
> > I think it's a mistake and I agree.
> >
> > I submitted a patch to remove the prefix from %pad.
> >
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/21/333
>
> Great! Your proposal looks good to me in principle, however you need to
> factor in SPECIAL having been set by `#' somehow as `number' will respect
> it. I suggest using the same field width calculation that `pointer' uses
> for `default_width' (sans the type used with `sizeof' of course, that is).

I don't think %#p is valid so it
shouldn't have been set by #.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/