From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: keith.busch@intel.com (Keith Busch) Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2017 09:13:51 -0600 Subject: [PATCH 3/3] nvme: fix eui_show() print format In-Reply-To: <20171103125516.GC25186@lst.de> References: <1509703370-20379-1-git-send-email-javier@cnexlabs.com> <1509703370-20379-4-git-send-email-javier@cnexlabs.com> <20171103125516.GC25186@lst.de> Message-ID: <20171103151351.GB11300@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, Nov 03, 2017@01:55:16PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Nov 03, 2017@11:02:50AM +0100, Javier Gonz?lez wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Javier Gonz?lez > > --- > > drivers/nvme/host/core.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/nvme/host/core.c b/drivers/nvme/host/core.c > > index ae8ab0a1ef0d..f05c81774abf 100644 > > --- a/drivers/nvme/host/core.c > > +++ b/drivers/nvme/host/core.c > > @@ -2108,7 +2108,7 @@ static ssize_t eui_show(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr, > > char *buf) > > { > > struct nvme_ns *ns = nvme_get_ns_from_dev(dev); > > - return sprintf(buf, "%8phd\n", ns->eui); > > + return sprintf(buf, "%8phD\n", ns->eui); > > } > > static DEVICE_ATTR(eui, S_IRUGO, eui_show, NULL); > > This looks correct. I wonder what the old code printed - does someone > have a device with an EUI-64 at hand to quickly cross check what we > did before? It just prints the same as the 'ph' format, which would look like this: 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 The change will make it look like this: 01-02-03-04-05-06-07-08 I think that was the original intention. Reviewed-by: Keith Busch