Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Message-ID: <e244390e3d245c94d6d2fb036943e63111ada86d.camel@perches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: add extra integer types to printk-formats
From:   Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     Louis Taylor <louis@kragniz.eu>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        pmladek@suse.com, geert+renesas@glider.be,
        linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com,
        Jon Flatley <jflat@chromium.org>
Date:   Tue, 05 Mar 2019 11:59:30 -0800
In-Reply-To: <CAKwvOdm4uCWCtSMVQDVTSKavpT0dCo+ayuwvoXtewmk+ksn5sA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20190303123647.22020-1-louis@kragniz.eu>
         <20190303201016.GO9224@smile.fi.intel.com>
         <CAKwvOdm4uCWCtSMVQDVTSKavpT0dCo+ayuwvoXtewmk+ksn5sA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.30.1-1build1 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 2019-03-04 at 09:59 -0800, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 3, 2019 at 12:10 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 03, 2019 at 12:36:47PM +0000, Louis Taylor wrote:
> > > A few commonly used integer types were absent from this table, so add
> > > them.
> > 
> > I'm not against the patch, but isn't obvious by reading POSIX and / or man
> > printf(3)?
> 
> You'd think; but based on the sheer number of -Wformat warnings
> (~450), I'm not so sure.

<shrug>  software defects are always present.

Many of the -Wformat warnings are bogus too.

There's nothing wrong with using %x for a unsigned int
of less than long size. (u8/u16)

>   At least with this patch they're "above the
> fold."

I'd personally go with
"posix plus kernel specific deletions and extensions"

> The kernel also has its own format flag extensions, and does not
> implement %n (for good reason), so it's better to be explicit than
> imply posix or glibc compat.

%i is also supported and used a few hundred times