From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753629Ab3KAO44 (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Nov 2013 10:56:56 -0400 Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:53241 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752870Ab3KAO4y (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Nov 2013 10:56:54 -0400 From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo To: Ingo Molnar Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Wei Yang , Ingo Molnar , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Subject: [PATCH 2/3] perf bench: Fix two warnings Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 11:56:46 -0300 Message-Id: <1383317807-25062-3-git-send-email-acme@infradead.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.8.1.4 In-Reply-To: <1383317807-25062-1-git-send-email-acme@infradead.org> References: <1383317807-25062-1-git-send-email-acme@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by merlin.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Wei Yang There are two warnings in bench/numa, when building this on 32-bit machine. The warning output is attached: bench/numa.c:1113:20: error: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions [-Werror=sign-compare] bench/numa.c:1161:6: error: format ‘%lx’ expects argument of t'long unsigned int’, but argument 5 has type ‘u64’ [-Werror=format] This patch fixes these two warnings. Signed-off-by: Wei Yang Acked-by: Ingo Molnar Cc: Ingo Molnar Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1379839764-9245-1-git-send-email-weiyang@linux.vnet.ibm.com Signed-off-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo --- tools/perf/bench/numa.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/perf/bench/numa.c b/tools/perf/bench/numa.c index 30d1c3225b46..a73c4ed8af17 100644 --- a/tools/perf/bench/numa.c +++ b/tools/perf/bench/numa.c @@ -1110,7 +1110,7 @@ static void *worker_thread(void *__tdata) /* Check whether our max runtime timed out: */ if (g->p.nr_secs) { timersub(&stop, &start0, &diff); - if (diff.tv_sec >= g->p.nr_secs) { + if (diff.tv_sec >= (time_t)g->p.nr_secs) { g->stop_work = true; break; } @@ -1157,7 +1157,7 @@ static void *worker_thread(void *__tdata) runtime_ns_max += diff.tv_usec * 1000; if (details >= 0) { - printf(" #%2d / %2d: %14.2lf nsecs/op [val: %016lx]\n", + printf(" #%2d / %2d: %14.2lf nsecs/op [val: %016"PRIu64"]\n", process_nr, thread_nr, runtime_ns_max / bytes_done, val); } fflush(stdout); -- 1.8.1.4