Hi York, On 15 July 2015 at 14:25, York Sun <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 07/15/2015 01:23 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: >> Hello York, >> >> On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 13:02:07 -0700, York Sun <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Simon, >>> >>> Did it happen to you with this warning? >>> >>> lib/fdtdec.c:108:4: warning: format ‘%x’ expects argument of type ‘unsigned >>> int’, but argument 3 has type ‘fdt_size_t’ [-Wformat=] >>> debug("addr=%08lx, size=%08x\n", >>> ^ >>> >>> I think when we have 64-bit physical address, as defined in fdtdec.h, this >>> debug >>> statement needs to be changed. I am thinking to change the typedef >>> fdt_addr_t to >>> phys_addr_t, and fdt_size_t to phys_size_t. What do you say? >> >> I say there is no reason to change a type just because a printf format >> specifier is wrong for it when building for 64-bit. >> >> Is there a rationale apart from the format specifier error? >> >> If not, then What should be done is fix the specifier so that it is >> correct in both 32 and 64 bits. >> > > Albert, > > Let me send a RFC patch so you can comment on it.
I'm not sure how to do what Albert is suggesting. Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
