Hi, tsutsui. (2012/10/09 21:20), Izumi Tsutsui wrote: >> Modified Files: >> src/sys/dev/pci: if_wm.c >> >> Log Message: >> Use PRIxPADDR to print a DMA address. This fix a problem that if_wm.c >> can't compile with WM_DEBUG on non-64bit platforms. > > sizeof(paddr_t) != sizeof(bus_addr_t) at least on sparc, > so using PRIx64 with an explicit (uint64_t) cast is safer, > I think. > (someone might claim we should add PRIxBUSADDRfoo, though) > > --- > Izumi Tsutsui >
Is the following patch OK? And, I've noticed that cz, sk and yds have the same problem... > (someone might claim we should add PRIxBUSADDRfoo, though) I prefer this. Index: if_wm.c =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/src/sys/dev/pci/if_wm.c,v retrieving revision 1.235 diff -u -r1.235 if_wm.c --- if_wm.c 9 Oct 2012 10:25:44 -0000 1.235 +++ if_wm.c 9 Oct 2012 14:24:41 -0000 @@ -2693,10 +2693,10 @@ lasttx = nexttx; DPRINTF(WM_DEBUG_TX, - ("%s: TX: desc %d: low %#" PRIxPADDR ", " + ("%s: TX: desc %d: low %#" PRIx64 ", " "len %#04zx\n", device_xname(sc->sc_dev), nexttx, - curaddr & 0xffffffffUL, curlen)); + (uint64_t)curaddr, curlen)); } } @@ -3154,9 +3154,9 @@ sc->sc_nq_txdescs[nexttx].nqtx_data.nqtxd_fields = htole32(fields); DPRINTF(WM_DEBUG_TX, - ("%s: TX: adv data desc %d 0x%" PRIxPADDR "\n", + ("%s: TX: adv data desc %d 0x%" PRIx64 "\n", device_xname(sc->sc_dev), nexttx, - dmamap->dm_segs[0].ds_addr)); + (uint64_t)dmamap->dm_segs[0].ds_addr)); DPRINTF(WM_DEBUG_TX, ("\t 0x%08x%08x\n", fields, (uint32_t)dmamap->dm_segs[0].ds_len | cmdlen)); @@ -3180,10 +3180,10 @@ lasttx = nexttx; DPRINTF(WM_DEBUG_TX, - ("%s: TX: desc %d: %#" PRIxPADDR ", " + ("%s: TX: desc %d: %#" PRIx64 ", " "len %#04zx\n", device_xname(sc->sc_dev), nexttx, - dmamap->dm_segs[seg].ds_addr, + (uint64_t)dmamap->dm_segs[seg].ds_addr, dmamap->dm_segs[seg].ds_len)); } -- ----------------------------------------------- SAITOH Masanobu (msai...@execsw.org msai...@netbsd.org)