vapierfil...@gmail.com wrote on 2011/04/25 00:38:31: > > On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 6:14 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > > Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > >> --- a/examples/standalone/timer.c > >> +++ b/examples/standalone/timer.c > >> @@ -186,7 +186,7 @@ int timer (int argc, char * const argv[]) > >> /* clear all events */ > >> *hwp->terp = (CPMT_EVENT_CAP | CPMT_EVENT_REF); > >> > >> - printf (usage); > >> + printf("%s", usage); > > > > I dislike this change. Which warning does the old code produce for > > you? > > i imagine he is using one of those "security conscious" compilers that > warn when you try to printf with a dynamic argument as the format. we
Yes, if gcc 4.4.5 counst as "security conscious" :) > probably want to disable this stuff for u-boot since it doesnt make > much sense by adding -Wno-format-nonliteral and -Wno-format-security > when the compiler supports it. > > as for this one particular change, it probably makes sense to change > it to puts(usage) anyways since the usage string contains no format > modifiers. it'll be faster this way. and the code should be written: > static const char usage[] = "..."; > > the current usage has useless overhead. Yes, but puts() adds an newline so you can't just replace the above printf with puts() Jocke _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot