From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964817AbaGESbp (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Jul 2014 14:31:45 -0400 Received: from smtprelay0217.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.217]:35265 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754940AbaGESbo (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Jul 2014 14:31:44 -0400 X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-Spam-Summary: 2,0,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,joe@perches.com,:::::::::,RULES_HIT:41:355:379:541:599:973:988:989:1260:1261:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1359:1373:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1538:1593:1594:1711:1714:1730:1747:1777:1792:2198:2199:2393:2551:2553:2559:2562:2691:2828:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3350:3622:3865:3871:3872:3873:3874:4321:5007:6119:7652:7903:8527:10004:10400:10848:11232:11658:11914:12050:12517:12519:12740:13019:13069:13311:13357:21080,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:fn,MSBL:0,DNSBL:none,Custom_rules:0:0:0 X-HE-Tag: car24_ea482ff2162f X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2082 Message-ID: <1404585099.6384.53.camel@joe-AO725> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] declance: Fix 64-bit compilation warnings From: Joe Perches To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" Cc: Grant Likely , David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2014 11:31:39 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: <20140702.182807.1245632778216212860.davem@davemloft.net> <1404356734.14741.18.camel@joe-AO725> <1404364565.14741.26.camel@joe-AO725> <1404368746.14741.36.camel@joe-AO725> <1404576420.6384.41.camel@joe-AO725> <1404583739.6384.51.camel@joe-AO725> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.10.4-0ubuntu1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2014-07-05 at 19:20 +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > On Sat, 5 Jul 2014, Joe Perches wrote: > > I don't think %#p is valid so it > > shouldn't have been set by #. > > Huh? As recently as last Wednesday you pointed me at the specific commit > from Grant that made it valid (GCC format complaints aside). Those gcc complaints are precisely the thing that makes it invalid. I believe you're tilting at windmills. Hey, it works sometimes. Knock yourself out.