From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joe Perches Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] declance: Fix 64-bit compilation warnings Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2014 09:07:00 -0700 Message-ID: <1404576420.6384.41.camel@joe-AO725> References: <20140702.182807.1245632778216212860.davem@davemloft.net> <1404356734.14741.18.camel@joe-AO725> <1404364565.14741.26.camel@joe-AO725> <1404368746.14741.36.camel@joe-AO725> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Grant Likely , David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" Return-path: Received: from smtprelay0112.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.112]:59206 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752327AbaGEQHF (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Jul 2014 12:07:05 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, 2014-07-05 at 15:56 +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > One question though, does either of you or anybody else know why we're > inconsistent about this 0x prefixing of virtual addresses vs physical > addresses? Specifically %p vs e.g. %pad. I think it's a mistake and I agree. I submitted a patch to remove the prefix from %pad. https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/21/333