Re: [TRIVIAL PATCH] block: Correct misuses of 0x%<decimal>

[Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>]

On Tue, 2015-08-04 at 10:19 +0800, yalin wang wrote:
> Ping ? 
> > On Aug 3, 2015, at 16:56, yalin wang <yalin.wang2010@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >> On Aug 3, 2015, at 16:03, Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >> On Mon, 2015-08-03 at 15:25 +0800, yalin wang wrote:
> >>>> On Aug 3, 2015, at 04:25, Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>> Correct misuse of 0x%d in logging messages.
> >>>> 
> >> []
> >>> why not use like this : dev_dbg(&h->pdev->dev, "   Max outstanding 
> >>> commands = %#x\n”  ? 
> >>> %#x will add 0x prefix automatically .
> >> 
> >> It's generally a consistency thing.
> >> A 0 value would be emitted as 0 and not 0x0.
> >> 
> > i try on my ubuntu , 
> > 
> > static int __init throtl_init(void)                                                                                                           
> >  {                                                                                
> >         printk("module init test: %#x %p\n", 0, (void *)0x123);                  
> >          return 0;                                                                   
> > 
> >  }                                                                                   
> > 
> >  module_init(throtl_init); 
> > 
> > #uname -a
> > Linux ubuntu 3.16.0-38-generic #52~14.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Fri May 8 09:43:57 UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
> > 
> > #dmesg
> > [259356.375586] module init test: 0x0 0000000000000123
> > 
> > it seems don’t need 0x%x for 0, just need %#x for all numbers.
> > there are lots of use like this, i can change them if needed:
> > 
> > # egrep -r  -i '0x%\d*x'  .  | wc -l 
> > 11776

I suggest not, it's not a standard usage and the 0
may be unexpected.