[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 1/2] net/xen-netfront: Correct printf format in xennet_get_responses
On 04/06/15 17:25, Joe Perches wrote: > On Thu, 2015-06-04 at 13:52 +0100, Julien Grall wrote: >> On 04/06/15 13:46, David Vrabel wrote: >>> On 04/06/15 13:45, Julien Grall wrote: >>>> On 03/06/15 18:06, Joe Perches wrote: >>>>> On Wed, 2015-06-03 at 17:55 +0100, Julien Grall wrote: >>>>>> rx->status is an int16_t, print it using %d rather than %u in order to >>>>>> have a meaningful value when the field is negative. >>>>> [] >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/xen-netfront.c b/drivers/net/xen-netfront.c >>>>> [] >>>>>> @@ -733,7 +733,7 @@ static int xennet_get_responses(struct >>>>>> netfront_queue *queue, >>>>>> if (unlikely(rx->status < 0 || >>>>>> rx->offset + rx->status > PAGE_SIZE)) { >>>>>> if (net_ratelimit()) >>>>>> - dev_warn(dev, "rx->offset: %x, size: >>>>>> %u\n", >>>>>> + dev_warn(dev, "rx->offset: %x, size: >>>>>> %d\n", >>>>> >>>>> If you're going to do this, perhaps it'd be sensible to >>>>> also change the %x to %#x or 0x%x so that people don't >>>>> mistake offset without an [a-f] for decimal. >>>> >>>> Good idea. I will resend a version of this series. >>>> >>>> David, can I keep you Reviewed-by for this change?# >>> >>> Can you make the offset %d instead? > > If you do, please change similar uses in > drivers/net/xen-netback/ in the same patch. The format is not really consistent accross the 2 drivers and even within the same driver (see pending_idx which is some times print with %x and %d). Anyway, ss it's a different drivers and maintainers I will prefer to send a separate patch for this. Regards, -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |