Messages in this thread | | | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: Large block device patch, part 1 of 9 | Date | 2 Dec 2002 16:06:51 -0800 |
| |
Followup to: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0209030113420.12861-100000@kiwi.transmeta.com> By author: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > 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 > 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..) >
While we're talking about printk()... is there any reason *not* to rename it printf()?
-hpa -- <hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt <amsp@zytor.com> - 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/
| |