Re: [PATCH 4/5 v2] x86 boot: show pfn addresses in hex not decimal in some kernel info printks

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...>, Johannes Berg <johannes@...>
Cc: Paul Jackson <pj@...>, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...>, <yhlu.kernel@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...>, <steiner@...>, <travis@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, <ying.huang@...>, Andi Kleen <andi@...>
Date: Monday, June 30, 2008 - 3:58 am

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 08:19:13 -0700 (PDT), "Linus Torvalds"
<torvalds@linux-foundation.org> said:

That would confuse the gcc format string checking... A solution that
just crossed my mind is leaving the format string as is (i.e., "%p"),
but prepending it with a special linux-specific string which does not
confuse gcc. Like: "&mac%p"... for simplicity & can be considered always
special in printk, and && can stand for a literal &. (or pick any
other character that is not used frequently in format strings and is
not %, of course.)


"&%p" could then be used for a symbol-lookup.

It doesn't help u64, though, but isn't it about time to unify u64 to
"unsigned long long" everywhere, anyhow? Is there any argument against
that except that a big sweep is necessary to clean up new warnings due
to printk format strings?

Greetings,
    Alexander

-- 
  Alexander van Heukelum
  heukelum@fastmail.fm

-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - IMAP accessible web-mail

--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [PATCH 4/5 v2] x86 boot: show pfn addresses in hex not d..., Alexander van Heukelum, (Mon Jun 30, 3:58 am)
[PATCH 2/5 v2] x86 boot: x86_64 efi compiler warning fix, Paul Jackson, (Sun Jun 22, 10:22 am)
[PATCH 1/5 v2] x86 boot: e820 code indentation fix, Paul Jackson, (Sun Jun 22, 10:21 am)