Linus Torvalds writes:
>
>
> On 3 Sep 2002, Andi Kleen wrote:
> >
> > x86-64 does that already. I did it originally to fix some printk warnings.
> > But it caused even more. I didn't bother then to change it back. Doesn't
> > seem to have too many bad side effects at least.
>
> The printk warnings should be easy to fix once everybody uses the same
> types - I think we right now have workarounds exactly for 64-bit machines
> where w check BITS_PER_LONG and use different formats for them (exactly
> because they historically have _not_ had the same types as the 32-bit
> machines).
>
> However, if anybody on the list is hacking gcc, the best option really
> would be to just allow better control over gcc printf formats. I have
> wanted that in user space too at times. And it doesn't matter if it only
See <printf.h>: register_printf_function(). -Wformat doesn't know about
new specifiers, though.
> happens in new versions of gcc - we can disable the warning altogether for
> old gcc's, as long as enough people have the new gcc to catch new
> offenders..
>
> (I'd _love_ to be able to add printk modifiers for other common types in
> the kernel, like doing the NIPQUAD thing etc inside printk() instead of
> having it pollute the callers. All of which has been avoided because of
> the hardcoded gcc format warning..)
>
> Linus
Nikita.
>
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 22:00:18 EST