From: Yanjiang Jin <redacted>
This patch is to avoid the below warning:
kernel/sched/cpuacct.c:298:25: warning:
format '%lld' expects argument of type 'long long int',
but argument 4 has type 'long unsigned int' [-Wformat=]
Signed-off-by: Yanjiang Jin <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/cputime.h | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
From: Scott Wood <oss@buserror.net> Date: 2016-11-30 14:41:08
On Mon, 2016-11-21 at 12:56 +0800, yanjiang.jin@windriver.com wrote:
quoted hunk
From: Yanjiang Jin <redacted>
This patch is to avoid the below warning:
kernel/sched/cpuacct.c:298:25: warning:
format '%lld' expects argument of type 'long long int',
but argument 4 has type 'long unsigned int' [-Wformat=]
Signed-off-by: Yanjiang Jin <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/cputime.h | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cputime.h
b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cputime.h
index 4f60db0..4423e97 100644
Hi Scott,
Thanks for your reminder!
I rephrased it as below:
-#define cputime64_to_clock_t(ct) cputime_to_clock_t((cputime_t)(ct))
+#define cputime64_to_clock_t(ct) \
+ (u64)(cputime_to_clock_t((cputime_t)(ct)))
and rebuilt the kernel, no warnings found.
New patch is attached, could you also help me to review it?
Regards!
Yanjiang
On 2016年11月30日 22:40, Scott Wood wrote:
On Mon, 2016-11-21 at 12:56 +0800, yanjiang.jin@windriver.com wrote:
quoted
From: Yanjiang Jin <redacted>
This patch is to avoid the below warning:
kernel/sched/cpuacct.c:298:25: warning:
format '%lld' expects argument of type 'long long int',
but argument 4 has type 'long unsigned int' [-Wformat=]
Signed-off-by: Yanjiang Jin <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/cputime.h | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cputime.h
b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cputime.h
index 4f60db0..4423e97 100644
Given the name of the function is "cputime64 to clock_t", surely we
should be returning a clock_t ?
Please fix it in cpuacct.c Also check out git commit
527b0a76f41d062381adbb55c8eb61e32cb0bfc9
sched/cpuacct: Avoid %lld seq_printf warning
Hi Balbir,
Where can I find this commit?
hello,
it is in next tree. :)
commit 527b0a76f41d062381adbb55c8eb61e32cb0bfc9
Author: Martin Schwidefsky [off-list ref]
Date: Fri Nov 11 15:27:49 2016 +0100
sched/cpuacct: Avoid %lld seq_printf warning
For s390 kernel builds I keep getting this warning:
kernel/sched/cpuacct.c: In function 'cpuacct_stats_show':
kernel/sched/cpuacct.c:298:25: warning: format '%lld' expects argument of type 'long long int', but argument 4 has type 'clock_t {aka long int}' [-Wformat=]
seq_printf(sf, "%s %lld\n",
Silence the warning by adding an explicit cast.
Signed-off-by: Martin Schwidefsky [off-list ref]
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) [off-list ref]
Cc: Linus Torvalds [off-list ref]
Cc: Peter Zijlstra [off-list ref]
Cc: Thomas Gleixner [off-list ref]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20161111142749.6545-1-schwidefsky@de.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar [off-list ref]
Given the name of the function is "cputime64 to clock_t", surely we
should be returning a clock_t ?
Please fix it in cpuacct.c Also check out git commit
527b0a76f41d062381adbb55c8eb61e32cb0bfc9
sched/cpuacct: Avoid %lld seq_printf warning
Hi Balbir,
Where can I find this commit?
hello,
it is in next tree. :)
Got it. Thanks!
Regards!
Yanjiang
quoted hunk
commit 527b0a76f41d062381adbb55c8eb61e32cb0bfc9
Author: Martin Schwidefsky [off-list ref]
Date: Fri Nov 11 15:27:49 2016 +0100
sched/cpuacct: Avoid %lld seq_printf warning
For s390 kernel builds I keep getting this warning:
kernel/sched/cpuacct.c: In function 'cpuacct_stats_show':
kernel/sched/cpuacct.c:298:25: warning: format '%lld' expects
argument of type 'long long int', but argument 4 has type 'clock_t
{aka long int}' [-Wformat=]
seq_printf(sf, "%s %lld\n",
Silence the warning by adding an explicit cast.
Signed-off-by: Martin Schwidefsky [off-list ref]
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) [off-list ref]
Cc: Linus Torvalds [off-list ref]
Cc: Peter Zijlstra [off-list ref]
Cc: Thomas Gleixner [off-list ref]
Link:
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20161111142749.6545-1-schwidefsky@de.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar [off-list ref]
Given the name of the function is "cputime64 to clock_t", surely we
should be returning a clock_t ?
That was my initial reaction but it seems that this function has meant "return
a u64 that is otherwise like clock_t" since before the beginning of git
history. Both generic implementations return u64, including
jiffies_64_to_clock_t which does so explicitly.
-Scott