Re: [PATCH 8/9] x86: ramdisk info print with high bits.

[Yinghai Lu]

On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 8:05 AM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 11/16/2012 12:53 AM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>> ramdisk could be loaded high now for 64bit.
>>
>> So need to print more digits for them.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  arch/x86/kernel/setup.c |    8 ++++----
>>  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c b/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
>> index c2eb535..0e13c6e 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
>> @@ -341,7 +341,7 @@ static void __init relocate_initrd(void)
>>       memblock_reserve(ramdisk_here, area_size);
>>       initrd_start = ramdisk_here + PAGE_OFFSET;
>>       initrd_end   = initrd_start + ramdisk_size;
>> -     printk(KERN_INFO "Allocated new RAMDISK: [mem %#010llx-%#010llx]\n",
>> +     printk(KERN_INFO "Allocated new RAMDISK: [mem %#018llx-%#018llx]\n",
>>                        ramdisk_here, ramdisk_here + ramdisk_size - 1);
>
> NAK, this is expected to match the resource print format (%pR), which
> prints 10 digits by default and then expands.  Furthermore, printing
> *18* digits is downright silly since we still don't have 72-bit addressing.

that is the same as in e820_print_map::

                printk(KERN_INFO "%s: [mem %#018Lx-%#018Lx] ", who,
                       (unsigned long long) e820.map[i].addr,
                       (unsigned long long)
                       (e820.map[i].addr + e820.map[i].size - 1));


that is for 64bit address.

that extra 2 is for "0x"

or you prefer to cast them to pointer and use %pR for them all?

or fix printk to add extra 2 for "0x" when # is found?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/