Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:32:14 -0700 (PDT) | From | "Randy.Dunlap" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/5] Revert "kmemtrace: fix printk format warnings" |
| |
On Tue, 19 Aug 2008, Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 10:51:32AM -0700, Randy.Dunlap wrote: > > On Tue, 19 Aug 2008, Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu wrote: > > > > > This reverts commit 79cf3d5e207243eecb1c4331c569e17700fa08fa. > > > > > > The reverted commit, while it fixed printk format warnings, it resulted in > > > marker-probe format mismatches. Another approach should be used to fix > > > these warnings. > > > > Such as what? > > > > Can marker probes be fixed instead?
Did you answer this?
> > After seeing & fixing lots of various warnings in the last few days, > > I'm thinking that people don't look at/heed warnings nowadays. Sad. > > Maybe there are just so many that they are lost in the noise. > > Hi, > > Check the next patch in the series, it provides the alternate fix.
Yep, I saw that later.
> I favor this approach more because it involves fewer changes and we > don't have to use things like "%zu" (which make data type size less > apparent).
%zu is regular C language. I.e., I don't get the data type not being apparent issue...
Maybe kmemtrace should just make everything be long long... :(
-- ~Randy
| |