From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Nov  2 17:23:51 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF176F18;
 Sun,  2 Nov 2014 17:23:51 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from monday.kientzle.com (99-115-135-74.uvs.sntcca.sbcglobal.net
 [99.115.135.74])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87658C7C;
 Sun,  2 Nov 2014 17:23:50 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (from root@localhost)
 by monday.kientzle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) id sA2HNmTe023456;
 Sun, 2 Nov 2014 17:23:48 GMT (envelope-from tim@kientzle.com)
Received: from [192.168.2.100] (gateway.kientzle.com [192.168.1.65])
 by kientzle.com with SMTP id 4njizintkpcasucim67574te8a;
 Sun, 02 Nov 2014 17:23:48 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from tim@kientzle.com)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.0 \(1990.1\))
Subject: Re: how to kernel printf a int64_t?
From: Tim Kientzle <tim@kientzle.com>
In-Reply-To: <20141102114614.38aa9034@akips.com>
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2014 09:23:48 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <3E8C7E0D-5858-4BFF-8C09-FAA68200B988@kientzle.com>
References: <439339249.2551223.1414702876172.JavaMail.root@uoguelph.ca>
 <97A82163-E78D-457E-B649-B243B41A6C6F@kientzle.com>
 <54558778.7050500@freebsd.org> <20141102114614.38aa9034@akips.com>
To: Paul Koch <paul.koch@akips.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1990.1)
Cc: Freebsd hackers list <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
 <freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-hackers>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2014 17:23:51 -0000


> On Nov 1, 2014, at 6:46 PM, Paul Koch <paul.koch@akips.com> wrote:
>=20
> On Sun, 02 Nov 2014 09:23:04 +0800
> Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> wrote:
>=20
>> On 10/31/14, 1:09 PM, Tim Kientzle wrote:
>>> On Oct 30, 2014, at 2:01 PM, Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> =
wrote:
>>>=20
>>>>       int64_t i;
>>>>=20
>>>>       printf("%qd\n", (u_quad_t)i);
>>>>=20
>>>> Is there a better way to printf() a int64_t in the kernel?
>>>=20
>>>     printf(=93%jd\n=94, (intmax_t)i);
>=20
> We've always used the PRIxxx types when coding for both 32/64 =
platforms,
> but it would have been really nice to have a standard way for time_t.
> Something like PRItt

This is the major reason I prefer the intmax_t cast approach: the PRI* =
macros only support a small handful of basic integer types.

The intmax_t cast approach only requires you to know whether it's signed =
(%jd with intmax_t) or unsigned (%ju with uintmax_t).


> On Nov 1, 2014, at 7:14 PM, Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> wrote:

> Oh, and is intmax_t going to be int64_t on all arches?

Yes, until we start supporting 128-bit arithmetic.  So the only runtime =
cost for this approach is that it might have to widen the value.  (Given =
the cost of printf in general, that's likely not a problem.)

Tim