[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <00081300-e891-3381-3acd-e3312e54fb58@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2018 14:58:16 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Ram Pai <linuxram@...ibm.com>, shuahkh@....samsung.com,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Cc: mpe@...erman.id.au, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, x86@...nel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mingo@...hat.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
benh@...nel.crashing.org, paulus@...ba.org,
khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
bsingharora@...il.com, hbabu@...ibm.com, mhocko@...nel.org,
bauerman@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, ebiederm@...ssion.com, arnd@...db.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 04/22] selftests/vm: typecast the pkey register
On 02/21/2018 05:55 PM, Ram Pai wrote:
> -static inline unsigned int _rdpkey_reg(int line)
> +static inline pkey_reg_t _rdpkey_reg(int line)
> {
> - unsigned int pkey_reg = __rdpkey_reg();
> + pkey_reg_t pkey_reg = __rdpkey_reg();
>
> - dprintf4("rdpkey_reg(line=%d) pkey_reg: %x shadow: %x\n",
> + dprintf4("rdpkey_reg(line=%d) pkey_reg: %016lx shadow: %016lx\n",
> line, pkey_reg, shadow_pkey_reg);
> assert(pkey_reg == shadow_pkey_reg);
Hmm. So we're using %lx for an int? Doesn't the compiler complain
about this?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists