val_bytes is of 'size_t', so it should be printed as '%zu'.
Fixes the following build warning on x86:
drivers/base/regmap/regmap.c:872:4: warning: format '%d' expects argument of type 'int', but argument 5 has type 'size_t' [-Wformat]
Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam <[email protected]>
---
drivers/base/regmap/regmap.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/base/regmap/regmap.c b/drivers/base/regmap/regmap.c
index 0585726..cc90dfc 100644
--- a/drivers/base/regmap/regmap.c
+++ b/drivers/base/regmap/regmap.c
@@ -869,7 +869,7 @@ static int _regmap_raw_write(struct regmap *map, unsigned int reg,
/* If the write goes beyond the end of the window split it */
while (val_num > win_residue) {
- dev_dbg(map->dev, "Writing window %d/%d\n",
+ dev_dbg(map->dev, "Writing window %d/%zu\n",
win_residue, val_len / map->format.val_bytes);
ret = _regmap_raw_write(map, reg, val, win_residue *
map->format.val_bytes);
--
1.7.9.5
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 02:07:18PM -0200, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> val_bytes is of 'size_t', so it should be printed as '%zu'.
>
> Fixes the following build warning on x86:
>
> drivers/base/regmap/regmap.c:872:4: warning: format '%d' expects argument of type 'int', but argument 5 has type 'size_t' [-Wformat]
>
> Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam <[email protected]>
Applied, thanks.
On 10/25/2012 09:07 AM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> val_bytes is of 'size_t', so it should be printed as '%zu'.
>
> Fixes the following build warning on x86:
>
> drivers/base/regmap/regmap.c:872:4: warning: format '%d' expects argument of type 'int', but argument 5 has type 'size_t' [-Wformat]
>
> Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]>
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=135041943424273&w=2
> ---
> drivers/base/regmap/regmap.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/regmap/regmap.c b/drivers/base/regmap/regmap.c
> index 0585726..cc90dfc 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/regmap/regmap.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/regmap/regmap.c
> @@ -869,7 +869,7 @@ static int _regmap_raw_write(struct regmap *map, unsigned int reg,
>
> /* If the write goes beyond the end of the window split it */
> while (val_num > win_residue) {
> - dev_dbg(map->dev, "Writing window %d/%d\n",
> + dev_dbg(map->dev, "Writing window %d/%zu\n",
> win_residue, val_len / map->format.val_bytes);
> ret = _regmap_raw_write(map, reg, val, win_residue *
> map->format.val_bytes);
--
~Randy
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 03:52:32PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]>
There's not much point in doing this after a patch has been applied...
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=135041943424273&w=2
So, the difference between Fabio's patch and your patch is that he sent
the patch in the normal fashion and didn't do the random extra stuff I
keep mentioning when I apply your patches. The things you do like the
random recipient lists and CCs in the text of the mail get in the way
and mean that for things like minor warning fixes the patch is likely to
get deferred for a big mailbox cleanup or (like this time) superceeded
by a version that's easier to deal with.