diff mbox series

tools/bpf:Fix the wrong format specifier

Message ID 20240724064252.5565-1-zhujun2@cmss.chinamobile.com (mailing list archive)
State Superseded
Delegated to: BPF
Headers show
Series tools/bpf:Fix the wrong format specifier | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
netdev/tree_selection success Not a local patch
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-PR success PR summary
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-1 success Logs for ShellCheck
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-0 success Logs for Lint
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-2 success Logs for Unittests
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-3 success Logs for Validate matrix.py
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-5 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / build-release
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-4 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / build / build for aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-9 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / test (test_verifier, false, 360) / test_verifier on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-10 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-11 success Logs for s390x-gcc / build / build for s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-13 success Logs for s390x-gcc / test (test_maps, false, 360) / test_maps on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-12 success Logs for s390x-gcc / build-release
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-16 success Logs for s390x-gcc / test (test_verifier, false, 360) / test_verifier on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-20 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / build-release
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-18 success Logs for set-matrix
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-17 success Logs for s390x-gcc / veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-21 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_maps, false, 360) / test_maps on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-19 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / build / build for x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-25 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_progs_parallel, true, 30) / test_progs_parallel on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-29 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / build-release / build for x86_64 with llvm-17-O2
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-26 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_verifier, false, 360) / test_verifier on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-30 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / test (test_maps, false, 360) / test_maps on x86_64 with llvm-17
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-33 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / test (test_verifier, false, 360) / test_verifier on x86_64 with llvm-17
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-34 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-37 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / test (test_maps, false, 360) / test_maps on x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-28 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / build / build for x86_64 with llvm-17
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-35 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / build / build for x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-36 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / build-release / build for x86_64 with llvm-18-O2
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-41 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / test (test_verifier, false, 360) / test_verifier on x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-42 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-6 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / test (test_maps, false, 360) / test_maps on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-8 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / test (test_progs_no_alu32, false, 360) / test_progs_no_alu32 on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-7 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / test (test_progs, false, 360) / test_progs on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-22 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_progs, false, 360) / test_progs on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-23 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_progs_no_alu32, false, 360) / test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-24 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_progs_no_alu32_parallel, true, 30) / test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-27 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / veristat / veristat on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-32 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / test (test_progs_no_alu32, false, 360) / test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with llvm-17
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-31 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / test (test_progs, false, 360) / test_progs on x86_64 with llvm-17
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-39 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / test (test_progs_cpuv4, false, 360) / test_progs_cpuv4 on x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-38 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / test (test_progs, false, 360) / test_progs on x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-40 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / test (test_progs_no_alu32, false, 360) / test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-14 success Logs for s390x-gcc / test (test_progs, false, 360) / test_progs on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-15 success Logs for s390x-gcc / test (test_progs_no_alu32, false, 360) / test_progs_no_alu32 on s390x with gcc

Commit Message

Zhu Jun July 24, 2024, 6:42 a.m. UTC 
The unsigned int should use "%u" instead of "%d".

Signed-off-by: Zhu Jun <zhujun2@cmss.chinamobile.com>
---
 tools/bpf/bpftool/xlated_dumper.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Comments

Geliang Tang July 24, 2024, 8:17 a.m. UTC | #1 
On Tue, 2024-07-23 at 23:42 -0700, Zhu Jun wrote:
> The unsigned int should use "%u" instead of "%d".

I guess you mean:

The format specifier of "unsigned int" in printf() should be "%u", not
"%d".

> Signed-off-by: Zhu Jun <zhujun2@cmss.chinamobile.com>

Acked-by: Geliang Tang <geliang@kernel.org>

> ---
>  tools/bpf/bpftool/xlated_dumper.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/bpf/bpftool/xlated_dumper.c
> b/tools/bpf/bpftool/xlated_dumper.c
> index 567f56dfd9f1..3efa639434be 100644
> --- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/xlated_dumper.c
> +++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/xlated_dumper.c
> @@ -349,7 +349,7 @@ void dump_xlated_plain(struct dump_data *dd, void
> *buf, unsigned int len,
>  
>  		double_insn = insn[i].code == (BPF_LD | BPF_IMM |
> BPF_DW);
>  
> -		printf("% 4d: ", i);
> +		printf("% 4u: ", i);
>  		print_bpf_insn(&cbs, insn + i, true);
>  
>  		if (opcodes) {
> @@ -415,7 +415,7 @@ void dump_xlated_for_graph(struct dump_data *dd,
> void *buf_start, void *buf_end,
>  			}
>  		}
>  
> -		printf("%d: ", insn_off);
> +		printf("%u: ", insn_off);
>  		print_bpf_insn(&cbs, cur, true);
>  
>  		if (opcodes) {
Quentin Monnet July 24, 2024, 8:48 a.m. UTC | #2 
2024-07-23 23:42 UTC-0700 ~ Zhu Jun <zhujun2@cmss.chinamobile.com>
> The unsigned int should use "%u" instead of "%d".
> 
> Signed-off-by: Zhu Jun <zhujun2@cmss.chinamobile.com>
> ---
>  tools/bpf/bpftool/xlated_dumper.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/bpf/bpftool/xlated_dumper.c b/tools/bpf/bpftool/xlated_dumper.c
> index 567f56dfd9f1..3efa639434be 100644
> --- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/xlated_dumper.c
> +++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/xlated_dumper.c
> @@ -349,7 +349,7 @@ void dump_xlated_plain(struct dump_data *dd, void *buf, unsigned int len,
>  
>  		double_insn = insn[i].code == (BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW);
>  
> -		printf("% 4d: ", i);
> +		printf("% 4u: ", i);


Thanks! But did you try to compile this? It produces a warning:

	xlated_dumper.c: In function ‘dump_xlated_plain’:
	xlated_dumper.c:352:28: warning: ' ' flag used with ‘%u’ gnu_printf format [-Wformat=]
	  352 |                 printf("% 4u: ", i);
	      |                            ^

Please fix it.

Quentin
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/tools/bpf/bpftool/xlated_dumper.c b/tools/bpf/bpftool/xlated_dumper.c
index 567f56dfd9f1..3efa639434be 100644
--- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/xlated_dumper.c
+++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/xlated_dumper.c
@@ -349,7 +349,7 @@  void dump_xlated_plain(struct dump_data *dd, void *buf, unsigned int len,
 
 		double_insn = insn[i].code == (BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW);
 
-		printf("% 4d: ", i);
+		printf("% 4u: ", i);
 		print_bpf_insn(&cbs, insn + i, true);
 
 		if (opcodes) {
@@ -415,7 +415,7 @@  void dump_xlated_for_graph(struct dump_data *dd, void *buf_start, void *buf_end,
 			}
 		}
 
-		printf("%d: ", insn_off);
+		printf("%u: ", insn_off);
 		print_bpf_insn(&cbs, cur, true);
 
 		if (opcodes) {