H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Rusty Russell wrote:
>> On Wed, 2007-04-04 at 23:14 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2007-04-04 at 23:06 -0400, Kyle Moffett wrote:
>>>
> (Erk, I wonder what I was thinking when I wrote that?) Can I ask
> for %#x (or 0x%x)? I'm easily confused.
How ab
Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-04-04 at 23:14 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>> On Wed, 2007-04-04 at 23:06 -0400, Kyle Moffett wrote:
>>
(Erk, I wonder what I was thinking when I wrote that?) Can I ask
for %#x (or 0x%x)? I'm easily confused.
>>> How about "%p" for pointers?
>> But
On Wed, 2007-04-04 at 23:14 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-04-04 at 23:06 -0400, Kyle Moffett wrote:
>
> > > (Erk, I wonder what I was thinking when I wrote that?) Can I ask
> > > for %#x (or 0x%x)? I'm easily confused.
> >
> > How about "%p" for pointers?
>
> But that would requ
On Wed, 2007-04-04 at 23:06 -0400, Kyle Moffett wrote:
> > (Erk, I wonder what I was thinking when I wrote that?) Can I ask
> > for %#x (or 0x%x)? I'm easily confused.
>
> How about "%p" for pointers?
But that would require casting the numbers to pointers.
-- Steve
On Apr 04, 2007, at 23:01:30, Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-04-04 at 15:14 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>> Currently the lguest32 error messages from bad reads and writes
>> prints a decimal integer for addresses. This is pretty annoying.
>> So this patch changes those to be hex outputs.
On Wed, 2007-04-04 at 15:14 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Currently the lguest32 error messages from bad reads and writes prints a
> decimal integer for addresses. This is pretty annoying. So this patch
> changes those to be hex outputs.
(Erk, I wonder what I was thinking when I wrote that?)
Can
Currently the lguest32 error messages from bad reads and writes prints a
decimal integer for addresses. This is pretty annoying. So this patch
changes those to be hex outputs.
This is applied on top of my debug patch.
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: linux-2.6.21-rc5-mm2/
