On 2016/10/5 20:13, Amit Shah wrote:
On (Fri) 30 Sep 2016 [14:27:26], Hailiang Zhang wrote:
On 2016/9/30 13:53, Amit Shah wrote:
In the meanwhile, can you check why the autobuilder fails to compile
with your patchset?
Yes, It was related to the 9th patch, where i used %lu to print value of
'uint64_t' type
which is incorrect. I think it can be fixed by use 'PRIu64' to print uint64_t
value.
The wrong codes are:
+ if (total_size != value) {
+ error_report("Got %lu VMState data, less than expected %lu",
+ total_size, value);
+ goto out;
+ }
Fixed:
+ if (total_size != value) {
+ error_report("Got%" PRIu64 " VMState data, less than expected %"
PRIu64,
+ total_size, value);
+ goto out;
+ }
Should i resend this series with this be fixed now ?
It's easier if you resend, that way it reduces the maintainer's burden
and makes reviewing/applying patches faster!
OK, I'll resend this series later, I saw Juan has sent a pull request,
It seems that some patches in that series conflicts with this patch-set,
I'll update this series based on that series.
Thanks,
Hailiang
Amit
.
