On Wed, 25 Apr 2018 16:30:22 +0200 Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <t...@toke.dk> wrote:
> print_uint() will silently promote its variable type to uint64_t, but there > is nothing that ensures that the format string specifier passed along with > it fits (and the function name suggest to pass "%u"). > > Fix this by changing print_uint() to use a native 'unsigned int' type, and > introduce a separate print_u64() function for printing 64-bit values. All > call sites that were actually printing 64-bit values using print_uint() are > converted to use print_u64() instead. > > Since print_int() was already using native int types, just add a > print_s64() to match, but don't convert any call sites. > > Cc: Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant <l...@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk> > Signed-off-by: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <t...@toke.dk> Yes, this makes sense. Maybe there should be a print_luint for consistency. Also, I tried (in vain) to make a version that allows GCC to check the format string. But it was a struggle and just gave up.
