Re: [PATCH] mm/memblock: replace u64 with phys_addr_t where appropriate

[Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 12:57:22PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue,  3 Jul 2018 20:05:06 +0300 Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> > Most functions in memblock already use phys_addr_t to represent a physical
> > address with __memblock_free_late() being an exception.
> > 
> > This patch replaces u64 with phys_addr_t in __memblock_free_late() and
> > switches several format strings from %llx to %pa to avoid casting from
> > phys_addr_t to u64.
> >
> > ...
> > 
> > @@ -1343,9 +1343,9 @@ void * __init memblock_virt_alloc_try_nid_raw(
> >  {
> >  	void *ptr;
> >  
> > -	memblock_dbg("%s: %llu bytes align=0x%llx nid=%d from=0x%llx max_addr=0x%llx %pF\n",
> > -		     __func__, (u64)size, (u64)align, nid, (u64)min_addr,
> > -		     (u64)max_addr, (void *)_RET_IP_);
> > +	memblock_dbg("%s: %llu bytes align=0x%llx nid=%d from=%pa max_addr=%pa %pF\n",
> > +		     __func__, (u64)size, (u64)align, nid, &min_addr,
> > +		     &max_addr, (void *)_RET_IP_);
> >  
> 
> Did you see all this checkpatch noise?
> 
> : WARNING: Deprecated vsprintf pointer extension '%pF' - use %pS instead
> : #54: FILE: mm/memblock.c:1348:
> : +	memblock_dbg("%s: %llu bytes align=0x%llx nid=%d from=%pa max_addr=%pa %pF\n",
> : +		     __func__, (u64)size, (u64)align, nid, &min_addr,
> : +		     &max_addr, (void *)_RET_IP_);
> : ...
> : 
 
Sorry, my bad...

>  * - 'S' For symbolic direct pointers (or function descriptors) with offset
>  * - 's' For symbolic direct pointers (or function descriptors) without offset
>  * - 'F' Same as 'S'
>  * - 'f' Same as 's'
> 
> I'm not sure why or when all that happened.
> 
> I suppose we should do that as a separate patch sometime.
> 

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.