On 2/1/21 7:36 PM, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 19:55:33 PST (-0800), rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Fix build warnings in the arch_numa common code:
../include/linux/kern_levels.h:5:18: warning: format '%Lx' expects argument of type 'long long unsigned int', but argument 3 has type 'phys_addr_t' {aka 'unsigned int'} [-Wformat=]
../drivers/base/arch_numa.c:360:56: note: format string is defined here
360 | pr_warn("Warning: invalid memblk node %d [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
../drivers/base/arch_numa.c:435:39: note: format string is defined here
435 | pr_info("Faking a node at [mem %#018Lx-%#018Lx]\n", start, end - 1);
Fixes: ae3c107cd8be ("numa: Move numa implementation to common code")
Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Atish Patra <atish.patra@xxxxxxx>
Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/base/arch_numa.c | 13 +++++++------
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
--- linux-next-20210125.orig/drivers/base/arch_numa.c
+++ linux-next-20210125/drivers/base/arch_numa.c
@@ -355,11 +355,12 @@ static int __init numa_register_nodes(vo
/* Check that valid nid is set to memblks */
for_each_mem_region(mblk) {
int mblk_nid = memblock_get_region_node(mblk);
+ phys_addr_t start = mblk->base;
+ phys_addr_t end = mblk->base + mblk->size - 1;
if (mblk_nid == NUMA_NO_NODE || mblk_nid >= MAX_NUMNODES) {
- pr_warn("Warning: invalid memblk node %d [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
- mblk_nid, mblk->base,
- mblk->base + mblk->size - 1);
+ pr_warn("Warning: invalid memblk node %d [mem %pap-%pap]\n",
+ mblk_nid, &start, &end);
return -EINVAL;
}
}
@@ -427,14 +428,14 @@ out_free_distance:
static int __init dummy_numa_init(void)
{
phys_addr_t start = memblock_start_of_DRAM();
- phys_addr_t end = memblock_end_of_DRAM();
+ phys_addr_t end = memblock_end_of_DRAM() - 1;
int ret;
if (numa_off)
pr_info("NUMA disabled\n"); /* Forced off on command line. */
- pr_info("Faking a node at [mem %#018Lx-%#018Lx]\n", start, end - 1);
+ pr_info("Faking a node at [mem %pap-%pap]\n", &start, &end);
- ret = numa_add_memblk(0, start, end);
+ ret = numa_add_memblk(0, start, end + 1);
if (ret) {
pr_err("NUMA init failed\n");
return ret;
Thanks, this is on for-next. Did you, by any chance, find %Lx documented
anywhere? It's not ISO C and the GCC source code says it's a GNU extension,
but I couldn't find it in the documentation (or even where to add it, which I
guess is how I forgot to send my version fo the patch).
'man sprintf' says this:
As a nonstandard extension, the GNU implementations treats ll and L as
synonyms, so that one can, for example, write llg (as a synonym for the
standards-compliant Lg) and Ld (as a synonym for the standards compli-
ant lld). Such usage is nonportable.
and linux/lib/vsprintf.c has some handling for it:
if (qualifier == 'L')
spec->type = FORMAT_TYPE_LONG_LONG;
and
case 'L':
if (is_sign)
*va_arg(args, long long *) = val.s;
else
*va_arg(args, unsigned long long *) = val.u;
break;
Does that help?