drivers/md/raid5.c:2866:3: warning: format '%lu' expects argument of type 'long

PATCH In review Fengguang Wu 3 participants 3 messages Sep 26, 2012 – Sep 27, 2012 Kernel janitors

lore

Share & tools

lore

Fengguang Wu

author

2012-09-26 01:39 UTC #0 lore raw

PATCH 32/33 drivers/md/raid5.c:2866:3: warning: format '%lu' expects argument of type 'long

Hi Alexander,

FYI, there are new compile warnings show up in

tree:   git://neil.brown.name/md for-next
head:   0179d361662367ab0f80b5822b162a1c0ba9b57d
commit: eadb9fb1d4da32ed1b143a6fc1997c4c42ea0422 [32/33] md: When RAID5 is dirty, force reconstruct-write instead of read-modify-write.
config: m68k-allyesconfig

All warnings:

drivers/md/raid5.c: In function 'handle_stripe_dirtying':
drivers/md/raid5.c:2866:3: warning: format '%lu' expects argument of type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'sector_t' [-Wformat] drivers/md/raid5.c:2866:3: warning: format '%lu' expects argument of type 'long unsigned int', but argument 5 has type 'sector_t' [-Wformat]

vim +2866 drivers/md/raid5.c
2850 sector_t recovery_cp = conf->mddev->recovery_cp;
2851
2852 /* RAID6 requires 'rcw' in current implementation.
2853 * Otherwise, check whether resync is now happening or should start.
2854 * If yes, then the array is dirty (after unclean shutdown or
2855 * initial creation), so parity in some stripes might be inconsistent.
2856 * In this case, we need to always do reconstruct-write, to ensure
2857 * that in case of drive failure or read-error correction, we
2858 * generate correct data from the parity.
2859 */
2860 if (conf->max_degraded = 2 ||
2861 (recovery_cp < MaxSector && sh->sector >= recovery_cp)) {
2862 /* Calculate the real rcw later - for now make it
2863 * look like rcw is cheaper
2864 */
2865 rcw = 1; rmw = 2;

Quoted 1 line

2866 pr_debug("force RCW max_degraded=%u, recovery_cp=%lu sh->sector=%lu\n",

2867 conf->max_degraded, recovery_cp, sh->sector);
2868 } else for (i = disks; i--; ) {
2869 /* would I have to read this buffer for read_modify_write */
2870 struct r5dev *dev = &sh->dev[i];
2871 if ((dev->towrite || i = sh->pd_idx) &&
2872 !test_bit(R5_LOCKED, &dev->flags) &&
2873 !(test_bit(R5_UPTODATE, &dev->flags) ||
2874 test_bit(R5_Wantcompute, &dev->flags))) {

---
0-DAY kernel build testing backend Open Source Technology Centre
Fengguang Wu, Yuanhan Liu Intel Corporation

NeilBrown

2012-09-26 01:52 UTC #1 lore raw

Re: [md:for-next 32/33] drivers/md/raid5.c:2866:3: warning: format '%lu' expects argument of type 'l

Quoted 42 lines · On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 09:39:08 +0800 Fengguang Wu <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Alexander,
FYI, there are new compile warnings show up in
tree:   git://neil.brown.name/md for-next
head:   0179d361662367ab0f80b5822b162a1c0ba9b57d
commit: eadb9fb1d4da32ed1b143a6fc1997c4c42ea0422 [32/33] md: When RAID5 is dirty, force reconstruct-write instead of read-modify-write.
config: m68k-allyesconfig
All warnings:
drivers/md/raid5.c: In function 'handle_stripe_dirtying':
drivers/md/raid5.c:2866:3: warning: format '%lu' expects argument of type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'sector_t' [-Wformat] drivers/md/raid5.c:2866:3: warning: format '%lu' expects argument of type 'long unsigned int', but argument 5 has type 'sector_t' [-Wformat]
vim +2866 drivers/md/raid5.c
2850 sector_t recovery_cp = conf->mddev->recovery_cp;
2851
2852 /* RAID6 requires 'rcw' in current implementation.
2853 * Otherwise, check whether resync is now happening or should start.
2854 * If yes, then the array is dirty (after unclean shutdown or
2855 * initial creation), so parity in some stripes might be inconsistent.
2856 * In this case, we need to always do reconstruct-write, to ensure
2857 * that in case of drive failure or read-error correction, we
2858 * generate correct data from the parity.
2859 */
2860 if (conf->max_degraded == 2 ||
2861 (recovery_cp < MaxSector && sh->sector >= recovery_cp)) {
2862 /* Calculate the real rcw later - for now make it
2863 * look like rcw is cheaper
2864 */
2865 rcw = 1; rmw = 2;
Quoted 1 line
2866 pr_debug("force RCW max_degraded=%u, recovery_cp=%lu sh->sector=%lu\n",
2867 conf->max_degraded, recovery_cp, sh->sector);
2868 } else for (i = disks; i--; ) {
2869 /* would I have to read this buffer for read_modify_write */
2870 struct r5dev *dev = &sh->dev[i];
2871 if ((dev->towrite || i == sh->pd_idx) &&
2872 !test_bit(R5_LOCKED, &dev->flags) &&
2873 !(test_bit(R5_UPTODATE, &dev->flags) ||
2874 test_bit(R5_Wantcompute, &dev->flags))) {

Quoted 3 lines

---
0-DAY kernel build testing backend Open Source Technology Centre
Fengguang Wu, Yuanhan Liu Intel Corporation

Thanks again!
I've fixed this up.

NeilBrown

Alexander Lyakas

2012-09-27 07:45 UTC #2 lore raw

Re: [md:for-next 32/33] drivers/md/raid5.c:2866:3: warning: format '%lu' expects argument of type 'l

In reply to Fengguang Wu

Thanks, Neil.

Quoted 54 lines · NeilBrown

Quoted 38 lines · On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 09:39:08 +0800 Fengguang Wu <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Alexander,
FYI, there are new compile warnings show up in
tree:   git://neil.brown.name/md for-next
head:   0179d361662367ab0f80b5822b162a1c0ba9b57d
commit: eadb9fb1d4da32ed1b143a6fc1997c4c42ea0422 [32/33] md: When RAID5 is dirty, force reconstruct-write instead of read-modify-write.
config: m68k-allyesconfig
All warnings:
drivers/md/raid5.c: In function 'handle_stripe_dirtying':
drivers/md/raid5.c:2866:3: warning: format '%lu' expects argument of type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'sector_t' [-Wformat] drivers/md/raid5.c:2866:3: warning: format '%lu' expects argument of type 'long unsigned int', but argument 5 has type 'sector_t' [-Wformat]
vim +2866 drivers/md/raid5.c
2850 sector_t recovery_cp = conf->mddev->recovery_cp;
2851
2852 /* RAID6 requires 'rcw' in current implementation.
  2853                 * Otherwise, check whether resync is now happening or should start.
  2854                 * If yes, then the array is dirty (after unclean shutdown or
  2855                 * initial creation), so parity in some stripes might be inconsistent.
  2856                 * In this case, we need to always do reconstruct-write, to ensure
  2857                 * that in case of drive failure or read-error correction, we
  2858                 * generate correct data from the parity.
  2859                 */
2860 if (conf->max_degraded = 2 ||
2861 (recovery_cp < MaxSector && sh->sector >= recovery_cp)) {
2862 /* Calculate the real rcw later - for now make it
2863 * look like rcw is cheaper
2864 */
2865 rcw = 1; rmw = 2;
Quoted 1 line
2866 pr_debug("force RCW max_degraded=%u, recovery_cp=%lu sh->sector=%lu\n",
2867 conf->max_degraded, recovery_cp, sh->sector);
2868 } else for (i = disks; i--; ) {
  2869                        /* would I have to read this buffer for read_modify_write */
  2870                        struct r5dev *dev = &sh->dev[i];
  2871                        if ((dev->towrite || i = sh->pd_idx) &&
Quoted 7 lines
2872 !test_bit(R5_LOCKED, &dev->flags) &&
2873 !(test_bit(R5_UPTODATE, &dev->flags) ||
2874 test_bit(R5_Wantcompute, &dev->flags))) {
---
0-DAY kernel build testing backend Open Source Technology Centre
Fengguang Wu, Yuanhan Liu Intel Corporation
Thanks again!
I've fixed this up.
NeilBrown