Re: [PATCH] raid: fix printk format warnings

[Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>]

On Saturday October 21, randy.dunlap@oracle.com wrote:
> From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
> 
> Fix printk format warnings, seen on powerpc64:
> drivers/md/raid1.c:1479: warning: long long unsigned int format, long unsigned int arg (arg 4)
> drivers/md/raid10.c:1475: warning: long long unsigned int format, long unsigned int arg (arg 4)
> 
> Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
> ---
> 
>  drivers/md/raid1.c  |    4 ++--
>  drivers/md/raid10.c |    4 ++--
>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff -Naurp linux-2619-rc2g4/drivers/md/raid1.c~raid_printk linux-2619-rc2g4/drivers/md/raid1.c
> --- linux-2619-rc2g4/drivers/md/raid1.c~raid_printk	2006-10-21 11:16:30.066109000 -0700
> +++ linux-2619-rc2g4/drivers/md/raid1.c	2006-10-21 11:20:57.288004000 -0700
> @@ -1474,8 +1474,8 @@ static void fix_read_error(conf_t *conf,
>  					       "raid1:%s: read error corrected "
>  					       "(%d sectors at %llu on %s)\n",
>  					       mdname(mddev), s,
> -					       (unsigned long long)sect +
> -					           rdev->data_offset,
> +					       (unsigned long long)(sect +
> +					           rdev->data_offset),
>  					       bdevname(rdev->bdev,
> b));

So you're saying that if you add an 'unsigned long long int' to an
'unsigned long int', the result is an 'unsigned long int'???
That is not what I would have expected.
I'm happy with the patch, but I'm very surprised that it is needed.
Is this behaviour consistent across various versions of gcc (if it is
convenient to check)??

Thanks,
NeilBrown