Messages in this thread | | | From | Nikita Danilov <> | Date | Tue, 3 Sep 2002 20:43:01 +0400 | Subject | Re: Large block device patch, part 1 of 9 |
| |
Linus Torvalds writes: > > > On 3 Sep 2002, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > x86-64 does that already. I did it originally to fix some printk warnings. > > But it caused even more. I didn't bother then to change it back. Doesn't > > seem to have too many bad side effects at least. > > The printk warnings should be easy to fix once everybody uses the same > types - I think we right now have workarounds exactly for 64-bit machines > where w check BITS_PER_LONG and use different formats for them (exactly > because they historically have _not_ had the same types as the 32-bit > machines). > > However, if anybody on the list is hacking gcc, the best option really > would be to just allow better control over gcc printf formats. I have > wanted that in user space too at times. And it doesn't matter if it only
See <printf.h>: register_printf_function(). -Wformat doesn't know about new specifiers, though.
> happens in new versions of gcc - we can disable the warning altogether for > old gcc's, as long as enough people have the new gcc to catch new > offenders.. > > (I'd _love_ to be able to add printk modifiers for other common types in > the kernel, like doing the NIPQUAD thing etc inside printk() instead of > having it pollute the callers. All of which has been avoided because of > the hardcoded gcc format warning..) > > Linus
Nikita.
> - 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/
| |