From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E9D0C433E0 for ; Mon, 8 Jun 2020 12:56:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B584206C3 for ; Mon, 8 Jun 2020 12:56:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="hnKDm+e2" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729319AbgFHM4i (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Jun 2020 08:56:38 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56170 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728931AbgFHM4h (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Jun 2020 08:56:37 -0400 Received: from mail-ej1-x642.google.com (mail-ej1-x642.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::642]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EDD66C08C5C2; Mon, 8 Jun 2020 05:56:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x642.google.com with SMTP id l27so18197192ejc.1; Mon, 08 Jun 2020 05:56:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=3UgnuIt4eUiizz8RKz+CLNlYY+s+snxRvwn2Nqiv8mA=; b=hnKDm+e2wot8X7hijnXlTxsjlMzVZArEMQbqShrDH6BDk82Q6ZkDZvU9ieBAB3VXsj Sw0/GsjulOpiufvM9GBWh1bFGDpFygFoqIVcxFSAjZM45cWJlpjXeL3ePl5g9RD8bIUE 6kukCAywLyQ19gqgsYBKwAflTXhxGLjdSh6Qu5fd7mVBJcgM/hi6VHnCyjb4HRe4RrZy b7Xkpjf9ogah8/JARCAT5p5Bda1Tbhh3iZXkAF7tgNeBS2mNErfLjAunjpd1wV42eyaD jlhLAZCSQMmZxrLezsMEjlvIQMNG9UB2EDzN+3DlOz9LBfzIXnFM0tw49prqWFSt6U+1 JmPw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=3UgnuIt4eUiizz8RKz+CLNlYY+s+snxRvwn2Nqiv8mA=; b=YUgSmjEoTDPWr5ut1H+sl7v7XGhPMEPIKI6YqgmIpm8uN5YNvdELrEYolG91MiksRT DHDeHux2KUQresSsLwXIcLw2KLHcQ7QRCg6HL+lOfhMiZx8sAeGD+xTC2JETLZg/qiAS AaWQO0VChht1KOdNgQOBzzK2smvKq8/OgKakxgLy+jbEsb9DyLFgqS0IvSNNFHrWGryB 8CW3rTyFZOmPMWKJlq+g4zY1g0nhOdeB4SO0H0+T+t8KnOJQjkpu44IRpPHurGZIbovM xV65z0ggHDEvh162NNuq2/N61FKaMO8ufqaFeXjWNxv/vFciDlLSV7YtcI/usHlEzXS0 QATg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532sBj61khfY7t9EYSQIHqDK3ryMYth/W1DZW49KpX914kwM1th+ BbbjN78e2gwM7z0g+aVqS+w4HnFx7CqArkdoPmQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyghfSi7+bGOS7SQqFDAcG804xFwgxwAKvBvSPJfgOsYDUEIS+KYDI19lMl7J6498uIrMhJhNEBfHuxmhpBMek= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:160a:: with SMTP id m10mr21575123ejd.170.1591620995724; Mon, 08 Jun 2020 05:56:35 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200605125545.31974-1-frank@allwinnertech.com> <20200605151810.vmgnnzp7cadfwsu5@gilmour.lan> In-Reply-To: <20200605151810.vmgnnzp7cadfwsu5@gilmour.lan> From: Frank Lee Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2020 20:54:51 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mmc: sunxi-mmc: do not hide address in sunxi_mmc_irq() To: Maxime Ripard Cc: Frank Lee , chaotian.jing@mediatek.com, Ulf Hansson , Matthias Brugger , Chen-Yu Tsai , rmfrfs@gmail.com, marex@denx.de, linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, Linux ARM , linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 11:18 PM Maxime Ripard wrote: > > Hi, > > On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 08:55:44PM +0800, Frank Lee wrote: > > From: Yangtao Li > > > > Using %px to show the actual address in sunxi_mmc_irq() > > to help us to debug issue. > > > > Signed-off-by: Yangtao Li > > Signed-off-by: Frank Lee > > I'm fairly sure this hash is on purpose, and both the commit log of the > %px introduction (ad67b74d2469) and the checkpatch message are pretty > explicit about it. > > What issue were you trying to solve here? There doesn't seem to be a strong requirement to force this to be printed out, I just think that ____ptrval____ is very unpleasant. Or delete %p directly? Yangtao