[PATCH] irda: Fix likely typo in output format string

[PATCH] irda: Fix likely typo in output format string

[Oleg Drokin]

%ul would print an unsigned with a letter l at the end which does
not seem to be desired here, on the other hand the value being printed
is u32 so just drop the l instead of converting to %lu

Signed-off-by: Oleg Drokin <green@linuxhacker.ru>
---
 drivers/net/irda/vlsi_ir.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/irda/vlsi_ir.c b/drivers/net/irda/vlsi_ir.c
index a0849f4..98308bd 100644
--- a/drivers/net/irda/vlsi_ir.c
+++ b/drivers/net/irda/vlsi_ir.c
@@ -279,7 +279,7 @@ static void vlsi_proc_ndev(struct seq_file *seq, struct net_device *ndev)
 		(idev->mode==IFF_SIR)?"SIR":((idev->mode==IFF_MIR)?"MIR":"FIR"));
 	sec = div_s64_rem(ktime_us_delta(ktime_get(), idev->last_rx),
 			  USEC_PER_SEC, &usec);
-	seq_printf(seq, "last rx: %ul.%06u sec\n", sec, usec);
+	seq_printf(seq, "last rx: %u.%06u sec\n", sec, usec);
 
 	seq_printf(seq, "RX: packets=%lu / bytes=%lu / errors=%lu / dropped=%lu",
 		ndev->stats.rx_packets, ndev->stats.rx_bytes, ndev->stats.rx_errors,
-- 
2.7.4

Re: [PATCH] irda: Fix likely typo in output format string

[Joe Perches]

(added Chunyan Zhang to cc)

On Fri, 2016-08-26 at 23:14 -0400, Oleg Drokin wrote:
> %ul would print an unsigned with a letter l at the end which does
> not seem to be desired here, on the other hand the value being printed
> is u32 so just drop the l instead of converting to %lu

Fixes: 497ec1f2a086 ("irda: vlsi_ir: Replace timeval with ktime_t")

Thanks Oleg

> diff --git a/drivers/net/irda/vlsi_ir.c b/drivers/net/irda/vlsi_ir.c
[]
> @@ -279,7 +279,7 @@ static void vlsi_proc_ndev(struct seq_file *seq, struct net_device *ndev)
>  		(idev->mode==IFF_SIR)?"SIR":((idev->mode==IFF_MIR)?"MIR":"FIR"));
>  	sec = div_s64_rem(ktime_us_delta(ktime_get(), idev->last_rx),
>  			  USEC_PER_SEC, &usec);
> -	seq_printf(seq, "last rx: %ul.%06u sec\n", sec, usec);
> +	seq_printf(seq, "last rx: %u.%06u sec\n", sec, usec);
>  
>  	seq_printf(seq, "RX: packets=%lu / bytes=%lu / errors=%lu / dropped=%lu",
>  		ndev->stats.rx_packets, ndev->stats.rx_bytes, ndev->stats.rx_errors,

Re: [PATCH] irda: Fix likely typo in output format string

[David Miller]

From: Oleg Drokin <green@linuxhacker.ru>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 23:14:06 -0400

> %ul would print an unsigned with a letter l at the end which does
> not seem to be desired here, on the other hand the value being printed
> is u32 so just drop the l instead of converting to %lu
> 
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Drokin <green@linuxhacker.ru>

%u is for unsigned values, and these are "s32" thus signed.

Re: [PATCH] irda: Fix likely typo in output format string

[Oleg Drokin]

On Aug 31, 2016, at 5:31 PM, David Miller wrote:

> From: Oleg Drokin <green@linuxhacker.ru>
> Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 23:14:06 -0400
> 
>> %ul would print an unsigned with a letter l at the end which does
>> not seem to be desired here, on the other hand the value being printed
>> is u32 so just drop the l instead of converting to %lu
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Oleg Drokin <green@linuxhacker.ru>
> 
> %u is for unsigned values, and these are "s32" thus signed.

Hm, you are right.
I could swear I saw them as unsigned when I looked at it.

Anyway can they really be negative? they are seconds and usec,
should I change them to u32 too?

Re: [PATCH] irda: Fix likely typo in output format string

[David Miller]

From: Oleg Drokin <green@linuxhacker.ru>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 17:36:44 -0400

> 
> On Aug 31, 2016, at 5:31 PM, David Miller wrote:
> 
>> From: Oleg Drokin <green@linuxhacker.ru>
>> Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 23:14:06 -0400
>> 
>>> %ul would print an unsigned with a letter l at the end which does
>>> not seem to be desired here, on the other hand the value being printed
>>> is u32 so just drop the l instead of converting to %lu
>>> 
>>> Signed-off-by: Oleg Drokin <green@linuxhacker.ru>
>> 
>> %u is for unsigned values, and these are "s32" thus signed.
> 
> Hm, you are right.
> I could swear I saw them as unsigned when I looked at it.
> 
> Anyway can they really be negative? they are seconds and usec,
> should I change them to u32 too?

If you're interesting in continuing with this, it is your
area for exploration not our's :-)