[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201224202152.GA3380@netronome.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 21:21:53 +0100
From: Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>
To: trix@...hat.com
Cc: kuba@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net, ast@...nel.org,
daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org, kafai@...com,
songliubraving@...com, yhs@...com, john.fastabend@...il.com,
kpsingh@...nel.org, gustavoars@...nel.org,
louis.peens@...ronome.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
bpf@...r.kernel.org, oss-drivers@...ronome.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nfp: remove h from printk format specifier
On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 12:20:53PM -0800, trix@...hat.com wrote:
> From: Tom Rix <trix@...hat.com>
>
> This change fixes the checkpatch warning described in this commit
> commit cbacb5ab0aa0 ("docs: printk-formats: Stop encouraging use of unnecessary %h[xudi] and %hh[xudi]")
>
> Standard integer promotion is already done and %hx and %hhx is useless
> so do not encourage the use of %hh[xudi] or %h[xudi].
>
> Signed-off-by: Tom Rix <trix@...hat.com>
Hi Tom,
This patch looks appropriate for net-next, which is currently closed.
The changes look fine, but I'm curious to know if its intentionally that
the following was left alone in ethernet/netronome/nfp/nfp_net_ethtool.c:nfp_net_get_nspinfo()
snprintf(version, ETHTOOL_FWVERS_LEN, "%hu.%hu"
If the above was not intentional then perhaps you could respin with that
updated and resubmit when net-next re-opens. Feel free to add:
Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists