From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751437AbbLMBNs (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Dec 2015 20:13:48 -0500 Received: from mail-qk0-f170.google.com ([209.85.220.170]:34499 "EHLO mail-qk0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750926AbbLMBNr (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Dec 2015 20:13:47 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2015 03:13:46 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Remove unneeded "0x" when %pa formatting is used. From: Andy Shevchenko To: Dmitry Krivenok , Rasmus Villemoes Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 10:33 PM, Dmitry Krivenok wrote: >>> if (size > max_size) { >>> dev_err(pcie->dev, >>> - "res size 0x%pap exceeds max supported size 0x%llx\n", >>> + "res size %pap exceeds max supported size 0x%llx\n", >> >> %pa also works. >> > > Yes, but AFAIK %pap and %pa are identical (see address_val() in lib/vsprintf.c), > so I'm not sure I understand your comment. > > Did you mean that %pa should be used instead of %pap? > I see that %pa is used much more often than %pap, but I didn't find any > evidence that %pap is deprecated. +Rasmus. No, it's not, but it explicitly for phys_addr_t (it might be nice to to have %par, for example for explicitly shown that is for resource_size_t, Rasmus?). For my opinion for resources better to use %pa for now, though %pap will work as well. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko