From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932221AbWJTOjB (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Oct 2006 10:39:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751724AbWJTOjB (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Oct 2006 10:39:01 -0400 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.177]:11491 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751722AbWJTOjB (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Oct 2006 10:39:01 -0400 From: Arnd Bergmann To: Dwayne Grant McConnell Subject: Re: Correct way to format spufs file output. Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 16:38:50 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 Cc: cbe-oss-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org References: <200610201023.12796.arnd@arndb.de> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200610201638.52404.arnd@arndb.de> X-Provags-ID: kundenserver.de abuse@kundenserver.de login:c48f057754fc1b1a557605ab9fa6da41 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday 20 October 2006 15:54, Dwayne Grant McConnell wrote: > I think %0xllx is the way to go. I would even advocate changing > signal1_type and signal2_type unless it is actually too dangerous. There is absolutely no reason why these should be hexadecimal, they are basically implementing a bool. > Is there even a case where changing from %llu to %0xllx would break things? > Perhaps with the combination of a old library with a new kernel? Right, a library or some script that has been written assuming there is no leading 0x. Arnd <><