Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161359AbWJKTaf (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Oct 2006 15:30:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161360AbWJKTae (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Oct 2006 15:30:34 -0400 Received: from mailer.gwdg.de ([134.76.10.26]:43232 "EHLO mailer.gwdg.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161358AbWJKTad (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Oct 2006 15:30:33 -0400 Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 21:28:46 +0200 (MEST) From: Jan Engelhardt To: "H. Peter Anvin" cc: Al Viro , torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] use %p for pointers In-Reply-To: <452D4306.3040407@zytor.com> Message-ID: References: <20061011145441.GB29920@ftp.linux.org.uk> <452D3BB6.8040200@zytor.com> <452D4306.3040407@zytor.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Report: Content analysis: 0.0 points, 6.0 required _SUMMARY_ Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 770 Lines: 22 >> > > %p will do no such thing in the kernel. As for the difference... >> > > %x >> > > might happen to work on some architectures (where sizeof(void >> > > *)==sizeof(int)), >> > > but it's not portable _and_ not right. %p is proper C for that... >> >> Ah I see your point, but then again, %lx could have been used. Unless >> there is some arch where sizeof(long) != sizeof(void *). > > That really makes gcc bitch, *and* it's wrong for a whole bunch of reasons. Ah my bad. Thanks for the slap reminder. :) -`J' -- - 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/