Linus Torvalds wrote:
quoted text
> 
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2008, Paul Jackson wrote:
>> I'd be inclined instead to use "%P" for symbolic addrs.
> 
> That doesn't work - gcc warns about it.
> 
> That turns out to be a problem with %#p too. 
> 
> It's really irritating how we cannot extend on the printk strings without 
> either having to throw out gcc warnings altogether. gcc has no extension 
> mechanism to the built-in rules ;/
> 
> The format warnings are too useful to drop entirely. I guess sparse could 
> be taught to do them, and then we could drop the gcc support for them. But 
> that would still limit coverage a _lot_.
> 

Any reason we can't just re-define %p to print the 0x prefix, just as 
glibc does?  It'd be easy enough to go and sed out all the 0x%p's 
currently in the kernel.

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