Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 02 Feb 2021 12:06:40 -0800 (PST) | Subject | Re: [PATCH] arch_numa: fix common code printing of phys_addr_t | From | Palmer Dabbelt <> |
| |
On Mon, 01 Feb 2021 19:51:07 PST (-0800), rdunlap@infradead.org wrote: > On 2/1/21 7:36 PM, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: >> On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 19:55:33 PST (-0800), rdunlap@infradead.org 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@infradead.org> >>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> >>> Cc: Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com> >>> Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@google.com> >>> --- >>> 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?
The manpage does it, I guess I just wasn't reading closely enough. Thanks!
| |