Bill, were you going to remove the prints ? On 19 May 2015 at 06:51, Bill Fischofer <[email protected]> wrote:
> Actually those printf() calls are vestigial from debugging and should be > removed. They were not intended to be part of the final tests. > > On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 3:32 AM, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin <[email protected]> >> --- >> Note: the new checkpatch does not seem to be happy with PRIu32 put this >> way (CamelCase and no space in concatenated strings) but I kept it >> homogeneous with the other printfs >> >> test/validation/odp_packet.c | 3 ++- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/test/validation/odp_packet.c b/test/validation/odp_packet.c >> index a363438..63493ec 100644 >> --- a/test/validation/odp_packet.c >> +++ b/test/validation/odp_packet.c >> @@ -62,7 +62,8 @@ static int packet_testsuite_init(void) >> if (udat == NULL || udat_size != sizeof(struct udata_struct)) >> return -1; >> odp_pool_print(packet_pool); >> - printf("about to init udata at addr %p size %d\n", udat, >> udat_size); >> + printf("about to init udata at addr %p size %"PRIu32"\n", >> + udat, udat_size); >> memcpy(udat, &test_packet_udata, sizeof(struct udata_struct)); >> printf("udata set in test_packet\n"); >> >> _______________________________________________ >> lng-odp mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp >> > > > _______________________________________________ > lng-odp mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp > > -- Mike Holmes Technical Manager - Linaro Networking Group Linaro.org <http://www.linaro.org/> *│ *Open source software for ARM SoCs
_______________________________________________ lng-odp mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
