Re: [PATCH] Make u64 long long on all architectures (was: the printk problem)

Re: [PATCH] Make u64 long long on all architectures (was: the printk problem)

[Andrew Morton]

On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 20:03:51 -0600 Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> wrote:

> [PATCH] Make u64 long long on all architectures
> 
> It is currently awkward to print a u64 type.  Some architectures use
> unsigned long while others use unsigned long long.  Since unsigned long
> long is 64-bit for all existing Linux architectures, change those that
> use long to use long long.  Note that this applies only within the
> kernel.  If u64 is being used in a C++ method definition, the symbol
> mangling would change.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox <willy@linux.intel.com>
> 
> diff --git a/include/asm-generic/int-l64.h b/include/asm-generic/int-l64.h
> index 2af9b75..32f07bd 100644
> --- a/include/asm-generic/int-l64.h
> +++ b/include/asm-generic/int-l64.h
> @@ -23,8 +23,13 @@ typedef unsigned short __u16;
>  typedef __signed__ int __s32;
>  typedef unsigned int __u32;
>  
> +#ifdef __KERNEL__
> +typedef __signed__ long long __s64;
> +typedef unsigned long long __u64;
> +#else
>  typedef __signed__ long __s64;
>  typedef unsigned long __u64;
> +#endif
>  
>  #endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */

This is (IMO) a desirable change and will prevent a heck of a lot of
goofing around, and will permit a lot of prior goofing around to
be removed.

But I bet there are lots of instalces of printk("%l", some_u64) down in
arch code where the type of u64 _is_ known which will now spew warnings.

Oh well.

Re: [PATCH] Make u64 long long on all architectures (was: the printk problem)

[Andrew Morton]

On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 20:03:51 -0600 Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> wrote:

> [PATCH] Make u64 long long on all architectures
> 
> It is currently awkward to print a u64 type.  Some architectures use
> unsigned long while others use unsigned long long.  Since unsigned long
> long is 64-bit for all existing Linux architectures, change those that
> use long to use long long.  Note that this applies only within the
> kernel.  If u64 is being used in a C++ method definition, the symbol
> mangling would change.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox <willy@linux.intel.com>
> 
> diff --git a/include/asm-generic/int-l64.h b/include/asm-generic/int-l64.h
> index 2af9b75..32f07bd 100644
> --- a/include/asm-generic/int-l64.h
> +++ b/include/asm-generic/int-l64.h
> @@ -23,8 +23,13 @@ typedef unsigned short __u16;
>  typedef __signed__ int __s32;
>  typedef unsigned int __u32;
>  
> +#ifdef __KERNEL__
> +typedef __signed__ long long __s64;
> +typedef unsigned long long __u64;
> +#else
>  typedef __signed__ long __s64;
>  typedef unsigned long __u64;
> +#endif
>  
>  #endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */

This is (IMO) a desirable change and will prevent a heck of a lot of
goofing around, and will permit a lot of prior goofing around to
be removed.

But I bet there are lots of instalces of printk("%l", some_u64) down in
arch code where the type of u64 _is_ known which will now spew warnings.

Oh well.

Re: [PATCH] Make u64 long long on all architectures (was: the printk problem)

[Michael Ellerman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2086 bytes --]

On Tue, 2008-07-22 at 03:05 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 20:03:51 -0600 Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> wrote:
> 
> > [PATCH] Make u64 long long on all architectures
> > 
> > It is currently awkward to print a u64 type.  Some architectures use
> > unsigned long while others use unsigned long long.  Since unsigned long
> > long is 64-bit for all existing Linux architectures, change those that
> > use long to use long long.  Note that this applies only within the
> > kernel.  If u64 is being used in a C++ method definition, the symbol
> > mangling would change.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox <willy@linux.intel.com>
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/asm-generic/int-l64.h b/include/asm-generic/int-l64.h
> > index 2af9b75..32f07bd 100644
> > --- a/include/asm-generic/int-l64.h
> > +++ b/include/asm-generic/int-l64.h
> > @@ -23,8 +23,13 @@ typedef unsigned short __u16;
> >  typedef __signed__ int __s32;
> >  typedef unsigned int __u32;
> >  
> > +#ifdef __KERNEL__
> > +typedef __signed__ long long __s64;
> > +typedef unsigned long long __u64;
> > +#else
> >  typedef __signed__ long __s64;
> >  typedef unsigned long __u64;
> > +#endif
> >  
> >  #endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
> 
> This is (IMO) a desirable change and will prevent a heck of a lot of
> goofing around, and will permit a lot of prior goofing around to
> be removed.
> 
> But I bet there are lots of instalces of printk("%l", some_u64) down in
> arch code where the type of u64 _is_ known which will now spew warnings.
> 
> Oh well.

As a rough estimate:

concordia powerpc(master) $ find arch/powerpc/ ! -name '*32.*' | xargs grep "%l" | grep -v "%ll" | wc -l
635


Someone's gonna get a lot of git points for fixing all those. Might keep
the speeling fix crowd busy for a while.

cheers

-- 
Michael Ellerman
OzLabs, IBM Australia Development Lab

wwweb: http://michael.ellerman.id.au
phone: +61 2 6212 1183 (tie line 70 21183)

We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors,
we borrow it from our children. - S.M.A.R.T Person

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] Make u64 long long on all architectures (was: the printk problem)

[Michael Ellerman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2086 bytes --]

On Tue, 2008-07-22 at 03:05 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 20:03:51 -0600 Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> wrote:
> 
> > [PATCH] Make u64 long long on all architectures
> > 
> > It is currently awkward to print a u64 type.  Some architectures use
> > unsigned long while others use unsigned long long.  Since unsigned long
> > long is 64-bit for all existing Linux architectures, change those that
> > use long to use long long.  Note that this applies only within the
> > kernel.  If u64 is being used in a C++ method definition, the symbol
> > mangling would change.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox <willy@linux.intel.com>
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/asm-generic/int-l64.h b/include/asm-generic/int-l64.h
> > index 2af9b75..32f07bd 100644
> > --- a/include/asm-generic/int-l64.h
> > +++ b/include/asm-generic/int-l64.h
> > @@ -23,8 +23,13 @@ typedef unsigned short __u16;
> >  typedef __signed__ int __s32;
> >  typedef unsigned int __u32;
> >  
> > +#ifdef __KERNEL__
> > +typedef __signed__ long long __s64;
> > +typedef unsigned long long __u64;
> > +#else
> >  typedef __signed__ long __s64;
> >  typedef unsigned long __u64;
> > +#endif
> >  
> >  #endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
> 
> This is (IMO) a desirable change and will prevent a heck of a lot of
> goofing around, and will permit a lot of prior goofing around to
> be removed.
> 
> But I bet there are lots of instalces of printk("%l", some_u64) down in
> arch code where the type of u64 _is_ known which will now spew warnings.
> 
> Oh well.

As a rough estimate:

concordia powerpc(master) $ find arch/powerpc/ ! -name '*32.*' | xargs grep "%l" | grep -v "%ll" | wc -l
635


Someone's gonna get a lot of git points for fixing all those. Might keep
the speeling fix crowd busy for a while.

cheers

-- 
Michael Ellerman
OzLabs, IBM Australia Development Lab

wwweb: http://michael.ellerman.id.au
phone: +61 2 6212 1183 (tie line 70 21183)

We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors,
we borrow it from our children. - S.M.A.R.T Person

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] Make u64 long long on all architectures (was: the printk problem)

[Andrew Morton]

On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 20:36:35 +1000 Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au> wrote:

> On Tue, 2008-07-22 at 03:05 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 20:03:51 -0600 Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> wrote:
> > 
> > > [PATCH] Make u64 long long on all architectures
> > > 
> > > It is currently awkward to print a u64 type.  Some architectures use
> > > unsigned long while others use unsigned long long.  Since unsigned long
> > > long is 64-bit for all existing Linux architectures, change those that
> > > use long to use long long.  Note that this applies only within the
> > > kernel.  If u64 is being used in a C++ method definition, the symbol
> > > mangling would change.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox <willy@linux.intel.com>
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/include/asm-generic/int-l64.h b/include/asm-generic/int-l64.h
> > > index 2af9b75..32f07bd 100644
> > > --- a/include/asm-generic/int-l64.h
> > > +++ b/include/asm-generic/int-l64.h
> > > @@ -23,8 +23,13 @@ typedef unsigned short __u16;
> > >  typedef __signed__ int __s32;
> > >  typedef unsigned int __u32;
> > >  
> > > +#ifdef __KERNEL__
> > > +typedef __signed__ long long __s64;
> > > +typedef unsigned long long __u64;
> > > +#else
> > >  typedef __signed__ long __s64;
> > >  typedef unsigned long __u64;
> > > +#endif
> > >  
> > >  #endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
> > 
> > This is (IMO) a desirable change and will prevent a heck of a lot of
> > goofing around, and will permit a lot of prior goofing around to
> > be removed.
> > 
> > But I bet there are lots of instalces of printk("%l", some_u64) down in
> > arch code where the type of u64 _is_ known which will now spew warnings.
> > 
> > Oh well.
> 
> As a rough estimate:
> 
> concordia powerpc(master) $ find arch/powerpc/ ! -name '*32.*' | xargs grep "%l" | grep -v "%ll" | wc -l
> 635

lolz.  If yesterdays-linux-next on todays-mainline wasn't such a
hilarious trainwreck I'd test your grepping.  I guess that could be
done on mainline too.

> Someone's gonna get a lot of git points for fixing all those. Might keep
> the speeling fix crowd busy for a while.

I'm not sure I have the energy for this.

But we really should do it.

Re: [PATCH] Make u64 long long on all architectures (was: the printk problem)

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

On Tue, 2008-07-22 at 20:36 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> concordia powerpc(master) $ find arch/powerpc/ ! -name '*32.*' | xargs
> grep "%l" | grep -v "%ll" | wc -l
> 635
> 
> 
> Someone's gonna get a lot of git points for fixing all those. Might
> keep
> the speeling fix crowd busy for a 

But a bunch of those might actually be real longs, not u64's ...

Easier to do the change and build something like ppc6xx_defconfig to get
a better approximation.

Ben.

Re: [PATCH] Make u64 long long on all architectures (was: the printk problem)

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

On Tue, 2008-07-22 at 20:36 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> concordia powerpc(master) $ find arch/powerpc/ ! -name '*32.*' | xargs
> grep "%l" | grep -v "%ll" | wc -l
> 635
> 
> 
> Someone's gonna get a lot of git points for fixing all those. Might
> keep
> the speeling fix crowd busy for a 

But a bunch of those might actually be real longs, not u64's ...

Easier to do the change and build something like ppc6xx_defconfig to get
a better approximation.

Ben.

Re: [PATCH] Make u64 long long on all architectures (was: the printk problem)

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

> 
> This is (IMO) a desirable change and will prevent a heck of a lot of
> goofing around, and will permit a lot of prior goofing around to
> be removed.
> 
> But I bet there are lots of instalces of printk("%l", some_u64) down in
> arch code where the type of u64 _is_ known which will now spew warnings.

Well, I'm about to call a big "warning fixing day" on the powerpc list,
I saw a few today when building a couple of configs and that hurts my
eyes so we may as well fold that in :-)

Cheers,
Ben.
 

Re: [PATCH] Make u64 long long on all architectures (was: the printk problem)

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

> 
> This is (IMO) a desirable change and will prevent a heck of a lot of
> goofing around, and will permit a lot of prior goofing around to
> be removed.
> 
> But I bet there are lots of instalces of printk("%l", some_u64) down in
> arch code where the type of u64 _is_ known which will now spew warnings.

Well, I'm about to call a big "warning fixing day" on the powerpc list,
I saw a few today when building a couple of configs and that hurts my
eyes so we may as well fold that in :-)

Cheers,
Ben.