Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 3 Sep 2009 10:38:44 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: linux-next: tip tree build warnings |
| |
* Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi all, > > Today's linux-next build (powerpc ppc64_defconfig) produced these warning: > > In file included from include/trace/ftrace.h:285, > from include/trace/define_trace.h:61, > from include/trace/events/timer.h:342, > from kernel/timer.c:50: > include/trace/events/timer.h: In function 'ftrace_raw_output_itimer_state': > include/trace/events/timer.h:280: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'cputime_t' > include/trace/events/timer.h: In function 'ftrace_raw_output_itimer_expire': > include/trace/events/timer.h:317: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 5 has type 'cputime_t'
Should be harmless with no runtime effects - the fix would be to harmonize the cputime_t types across architectures.
> Introduced by commit 3f0a525ebf4b8ef041a332bbe4a73aee94bb064b ("timers: Add tracepoints for itimer") from the tip tree. > > cputime_t is variously "u64", "unsigned long long" and "unsigned > long" on different architectures.
Should be unsigned long i think. Most architectures use it as unsigned long via include/asm-generic/cputime.h, except these three:
arch/ia64/include/asm/cputime.h:typedef u64 cputime_t; arch/powerpc/include/asm/cputime.h:typedef u64 cputime_t; arch/s390/include/asm/cputime.h:typedef unsigned long long cputime_t;
Or we could eliminate the type altogether as well and standardize on u64. Thomas?
Ingo
| |