From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 5 10:52:46 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDFAF16A4CE; Thu, 5 May 2005 10:52:46 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mailout1.pacific.net.au (mailout1.pacific.net.au [61.8.0.84]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62D7643D82; Thu, 5 May 2005 10:52:46 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bde@zeta.org.au) Received: from mailproxy2.pacific.net.au (mailproxy2.pacific.net.au [61.8.0.87])j45AqirI025686; Thu, 5 May 2005 20:52:44 +1000 Received: from katana.zip.com.au (katana.zip.com.au [61.8.7.246]) j45AqcRL011214; Thu, 5 May 2005 20:52:43 +1000 Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 20:52:39 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans X-X-Sender: bde@delplex.bde.org To: Xin LI In-Reply-To: <20050505090907.GA41071@frontfree.net> Message-ID: <20050505204235.L7880@delplex.bde.org> References: <20050505084428.A12D07306E@freebsd-current.sentex.ca> <20050505090907.GA41071@frontfree.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 05 May 2005 12:01:57 +0000 cc: amd64@FreeBSD.org cc: wpaul@FreeBSD.org cc: FreeBSD Tinderbox cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [current tinderbox] failure on amd64/amd64 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 10:52:47 -0000 On Thu, 5 May 2005, Xin LI wrote: > On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 04:44:28AM -0400, FreeBSD Tinderbox wrote: >> /tinderbox/CURRENT/amd64/amd64/src/sys/modules/ndis/../../compat/ndis/subr_ndis.c: In function `NdisMFreeSharedMemory': >> /tinderbox/CURRENT/amd64/amd64/src/sys/modules/ndis/../../compat/ndis/subr_ndis.c:1710: warning: long long unsigned int format, uint64_t arg (arg 3) > > Maybe we should make use of the PRIx64 macro? (see patch attached) No. PRI* is a bug in C99; it should never be used. Just cast the arg to a suitable larger type with a known format (uintmax_t here). (C99 is missing support for better ways; either %I as in sfio (?) or %DWIM where the compiler rewrites the string to match the arg would be better.) Bruce