"Pranith Kumar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> --- filemap.c.orig 2008-10-17 16:27:29.774643000 +0530
> +++ filemap.c 2008-10-17 16:28:09.707083000 +0530
> @@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ int filemap_extent_io(struct buffer *buf
>
> index_t start, limit;
> guess_extent(buffer, &start, &limit, 1);
> - printf("---- extent 0x%Lx/%Lx ----\n", (L)start, (L)limit - start);
> + printf("---- extent 0x%Lx/%Lx ----\n", (L)start, (L)(limit - start));
> struct path path[levels + 1];
> struct extent seg[1000];
> if ((err = probe(&inode->btree, start, path)))
> @@ -176,7 +176,7 @@ retry:;
>
> printf("segs (offset = %Lx):", (L)offset);
> for (i = 0, index = start; i < segs; i++) {
> - printf(" %Lx => %Lx/%x;", (L)index - offset, (L)seg[i].block,
> extent_count(seg[i]));
> + printf(" %Lx => %Lx/%x;", (L)(index - offset), (L)seg[i].block,
> extent_count(seg[i]));
> index += extent_count(seg[i]);
> }
> printf(" (%i)\n", segs);
Whoops, sorry about that. gcc-4.3.2 didn't warn those. If warning flags
is bothering us, we can just reject that patch.
--
OGAWA Hirofumi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
_______________________________________________
Tux3 mailing list
[email protected]
http://tux3.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tux3
