On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 10:55:43AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 02:22:23PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> > On 03/04/2019 07:41, Daniel Jordan wrote:
> 
> > > - dev_dbg(dev, "[%d] RLIMIT_MEMLOCK %c%ld %ld/%ld%s\n", current->pid,
> > > + dev_dbg(dev, "[%d] RLIMIT_MEMLOCK %c%ld %lld/%lu%s\n", current->pid,
> > >           incr ? '+' : '-', npages << PAGE_SHIFT,
> > > -         current->mm->locked_vm << PAGE_SHIFT, rlimit(RLIMIT_MEMLOCK),
> > > -         ret ? "- exceeded" : "");
> > > +         (s64)atomic64_read(&current->mm->locked_vm) << PAGE_SHIFT,
> > > +         rlimit(RLIMIT_MEMLOCK), ret ? "- exceeded" : "");
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > atomic64_read() returns "long" which matches "%ld", why this change (and
> > similar below)? You did not do this in the two pr_debug()s above anyway.
> 
> Unfortunately, architectures return inconsistent types for atomic64 ops.
> 
> Some return long (e..g. powerpc), some return long long (e.g. arc), and
> some return s64 (e.g. x86).

Yes, Mark said it all, I'm just chiming in to confirm that's why I added the
cast.

Btw, thanks for doing this, Mark.

Reply via email to