Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Scott Wood,
In message 4A550FAE.30500@freescale.com you wrote:
And by default we would add CONFIG_SYS_NO_64BIT_VSPRINTF to all board config files?
No, that's the point -- it would require the board maintainer to explicitly say "this board doesn't need this". By default we would provide a correct printf.
But then applying this patch would break some boards that are working now. Shirking off responsibility and have the board maintainers fix it again is IMHO not the right thing to do.
What would break? If things would no longer fit where they currently fit, that could happen on any change that increases code size -- possibly even just by changing compilers (this exact thing happened to the NAND bootstrap on some boards with very recent GCC). That's life, and IMHO it is not reasonable to arbitrarily block changes that fix bugs because of the theoretical possibility that it might push someone's size over the limit.
A quick grep shows several instances of %ll/%L in other places that may not be obvious to the board maintainer (cmd_mmc, ubi, disk/part_efi, cpu/mpc8xxx/ddr, lmb, disk/part, cmd_ide, reiserfs). Boards that use those without 64-bit printf are broken *right now*.
-Scott