Hello,
When adding a __printf attribute to reiserfs_panic, gcc reported an
inconsistent format for __RASSERT. This macro is currently defined in
fs/reiserfs/reiserfs.h as:
reiserfs_panic(NULL, "assertion failure", "(" #cond ") at " \
__FILE__ ":%i:%s: " format "\n", \
in_interrupt() ? -1 : task_pid_nr(current), \
__LINE__, __func__ , ##args);
In the format string, the first parameter is a line number, but in the
arguments there is a PID before. Before c3a9c2109f84 ("reiserfs: rework
reiserfs_panic") [1], the format string began with "reiserfs[%i]" [2],
which explains the PID in the arguments.
I see three possibilities:
* I missed something in my analysis and in fact the PID argument is
processed by reiserfs_panic (don't know where), or
* the PID argument is not used and should be removed, or
* the PID is useful and "[%i]" should be added somewhere in the format
string.
Which one would you prefer?
Also, I found this when building the kernel with "allmodconfig" on
x86_64. With "defconfig" gcc does not report this error, but I guess it
is because without CONFIG_REISERFS_CHECK, __RASSERT is never used.
Regards,
Nicolas
[1]
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=c3a9c2109f84882b9b3178f6b1838d550d3df0ec
[2]
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/include/linux/reiserfs_fs.h?id=78b6513d2881f1a759fb9825a036d926392de084#n91
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe reiserfs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
