search for: _64_

...format strings to %llu > > and adds a cast to u64, which makes it work the same way everywhere. > > You have to wonder why atomic64_* functions do not use u64 types. > If they're not reliant on manipulating 64-bit quantities, then what's > the point of calling them atomic _64_. I haven't checked all architectures, but I assume what happens is that 64-bit ones just #define atomic64_t atomic_long_t, so they don't have to provide three sets of functions. Arnd

...format strings to %llu > > and adds a cast to u64, which makes it work the same way everywhere. > > You have to wonder why atomic64_* functions do not use u64 types. > If they're not reliant on manipulating 64-bit quantities, then what's > the point of calling them atomic _64_. I haven't checked all architectures, but I assume what happens is that 64-bit ones just #define atomic64_t atomic_long_t, so they don't have to provide three sets of functions. Arnd

The virtgpu driver prints the last_seq variable using the %ld or %lu format string, which does not work correctly on all architectures and causes this compiler warning on ARM: drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_fence.c: In function 'virtio_timeline_value_str': drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_fence.c:64:22: warning: format '%lu' expects argument of type 'long unsigned int', but

The virtgpu driver prints the last_seq variable using the %ld or %lu format string, which does not work correctly on all architectures and causes this compiler warning on ARM: drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_fence.c: In function 'virtio_timeline_value_str': drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_fence.c:64:22: warning: format '%lu' expects argument of type 'long unsigned int', but

...rnings, this changes the format strings to %llu > and adds a cast to u64, which makes it work the same way everywhere. You have to wonder why atomic64_* functions do not use u64 types. If they're not reliant on manipulating 64-bit quantities, then what's the point of calling them atomic _64_. -- FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up according to speedtest.net.

...t; > > and adds a cast to u64, which makes it work the same way everywhere. > > > > You have to wonder why atomic64_* functions do not use u64 types. > > If they're not reliant on manipulating 64-bit quantities, then what's > > the point of calling them atomic _64_. > > I haven't checked all architectures, but I assume what happens is that > 64-bit ones just #define atomic64_t atomic_long_t, so they don't have > to provide three sets of functions. scratch that, I just looked at all the architectures and found that it's just completel...

...d adds a cast to u64, which makes it work the same way everywhere. >> > >> > You have to wonder why atomic64_* functions do not use u64 types. >> > If they're not reliant on manipulating 64-bit quantities, then what's >> > the point of calling them atomic _64_. >> >> I haven't checked all architectures, but I assume what happens is that >> 64-bit ones just #define atomic64_t atomic_long_t, so they don't have >> to provide three sets of functions. > > scratch that, I just looked at all the architectures and found that...

...d adds a cast to u64, which makes it work the same way everywhere. >> > >> > You have to wonder why atomic64_* functions do not use u64 types. >> > If they're not reliant on manipulating 64-bit quantities, then what's >> > the point of calling them atomic _64_. >> >> I haven't checked all architectures, but I assume what happens is that >> 64-bit ones just #define atomic64_t atomic_long_t, so they don't have >> to provide three sets of functions. > > scratch that, I just looked at all the architectures and found that...