Re: [PATCH] raid: fix printk format warnings

["Randy.Dunlap" <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>]

Neil Brown wrote:
> On Saturday October 21, randy.dunlap@oracle.com wrote:
>> From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
>>
>> Fix printk format warnings, seen on powerpc64:
>> drivers/md/raid1.c:1479: warning: long long unsigned int format, long unsigned int arg (arg 4)
>> drivers/md/raid10.c:1475: warning: long long unsigned int format, long unsigned int arg (arg 4)
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
>> ---
>>
>>  drivers/md/raid1.c  |    4 ++--
>>  drivers/md/raid10.c |    4 ++--
>>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff -Naurp linux-2619-rc2g4/drivers/md/raid1.c~raid_printk linux-2619-rc2g4/drivers/md/raid1.c
>> --- linux-2619-rc2g4/drivers/md/raid1.c~raid_printk	2006-10-21 11:16:30.066109000 -0700
>> +++ linux-2619-rc2g4/drivers/md/raid1.c	2006-10-21 11:20:57.288004000 -0700
>> @@ -1474,8 +1474,8 @@ static void fix_read_error(conf_t *conf,
>>  					       "raid1:%s: read error corrected "
>>  					       "(%d sectors at %llu on %s)\n",
>>  					       mdname(mddev), s,
>> -					       (unsigned long long)sect +
>> -					           rdev->data_offset,
>> +					       (unsigned long long)(sect +
>> +					           rdev->data_offset),
>>  					       bdevname(rdev->bdev,
>> b));
> 
> So you're saying that if you add an 'unsigned long long int' to an
> 'unsigned long int', the result is an 'unsigned long int'???
> That is not what I would have expected.
> I'm happy with the patch, but I'm very surprised that it is needed.
> Is this behaviour consistent across various versions of gcc (if it is
> convenient to check)??

I've only seen it on powerpc64.  It could well be a gcc problem AFAICT.
Feel free to drop it.  Thanks for the discussion.

gfs2 and DLM also produce about 10-12 of these warnings IIRC (still on
powerpc64).

-- 
~Randy