Am 23.09.2010 21:03, schrieb Stefan Weil:
Am 23.09.2010 20:53, schrieb Blue Swirl:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 6:37 PM, Stefan Weil<w...@mail.berlios.de>
wrote:
Adding the gcc format attribute detects a format bug
which is fixed here.
Cc: Blue Swirl<blauwir...@gmail.com>
Cc: Kevin Wolf<kw...@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Stefan Weil<w...@mail.berlios.de>
---
block/blkverify.c | 5 +++--
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/blkverify.c b/block/blkverify.c
index 8083464..b39fb67 100644
--- a/block/blkverify.c
+++ b/block/blkverify.c
@@ -53,7 +53,8 @@ static AIOPool blkverify_aio_pool = {
.cancel = blkverify_aio_cancel,
};
-static void blkverify_err(BlkverifyAIOCB *acb, const char *fmt, ...)
+static void GCC_FMT_ATTR(2, 3) blkverify_err(BlkverifyAIOCB *acb,
+ const char *fmt, ...)
{
va_list ap;
@@ -300,7 +301,7 @@ static void
blkverify_verify_readv(BlkverifyAIOCB *acb)
ssize_t offset =
blkverify_iovec_compare(acb->qiov,&acb->raw_qiov);
if (offset != -1) {
blkverify_err(acb, "contents mismatch in sector %ld",
- acb->sector_num + (offset / BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE));
+ (long)(acb->sector_num + (offset /
BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE)));
sector_num is int64_t, so the correct fix is to change '%ld' to '%"
PRId64'.
I noticed that, too. But offset is ssize_t.
Can you always be sure that (int64_t + ssize_t) results in a int64_t?
I don't think it's so easy.
I think you are correct, the format should use PRId64.
The type cast is still necessary, but should cast to int64_t.
(needed when int64_t == long and ssize_t == long long).
If you agree, I'll send a new patch.
Stefan
