On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 19:05:55 -0400
"J. Bruce Fields" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 12:29:33AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 12:27:37 +1000 NeilBrown <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > +static void exp_flags(struct seq_file *m, int flag, int fsid,
> > > + uid_t anonu, uid_t anong, struct nfsd4_fs_locations *fsloc)
> > > +{
> > > + show_expflags(m, flag, NFSEXP_ALLFLAGS);
> > > if (flag & NFSEXP_FSID)
> > > - seq_printf(m, "%sfsid=%d", first++?",":"", fsid);
> > > + seq_printf(m, ",fsid=%d", fsid);
> > > if (anonu != (uid_t)-2 && anonu != (0x10000-2))
> > > - seq_printf(m, "%sanonuid=%d", first++?",":"", anonu);
> > > + seq_printf(m, ",sanonuid=%d", anonu);
> >
> > It's a bit presumptuous to print a uid_t with "%d". Fortunately it
> > will work OK with all the present architectures.
> >
> > But in general: be cautious when feeding opaque types to printk.
>
> OK, here I'm still confused--what should we be doing instead?
>
Nothing? I was just having a little self-muse.
If one was really anal, one could typecast it to an unsigned long long in
the printk, then feel smug when we switch to 64-bit uid's.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
