[openib-general] kdapl build error on ia64

[James Lentini]

On Tue, 2 Aug 2005, Hal Rosenstock wrote:

> On Mon, 2005-08-01 at 18:23, John Partridge wrote:
>> Hal/James,
>>
>> Here is a patch that fixes the ia64 build problem and the warnings I had previously posted.
>> The patch ONLY fixes the problems in the trunk tree ( apply from the trunk subdir) and NOT
>> in users/jlentini,
>
> I believe that users/jlentini is now obsolete and the trunk supercedes
> this so this is fine.
>
>> the following files also need to be fixed (should be easy enough for
>> James to hack the patch file to do it) :-
>>
>> users/jlentini/linux-kernel/dat-provider/dapl_openib_cm.c
>> users/jlentini/linux-kernel/dat-provider/dapl_util.h
>>
>> The patch is based on svn revision 2935 (copy also attached to email)
>> =================== patch begin ==============================
>>
>> --- src/linux-kernel/infiniband/ulp/kdapl/ib/dapl_openib_cm.c   2005-07-26 00:00:10.000000000 -0500
>> +++ src/linux-kernel/infiniband/ulp/kdapl/ib/dapl_openib_cm.c   2005-08-01 11:56:25.240418715 -0500
>> @@ -342,7 +342,7 @@
>>                                                &cm_ctx->dapl_comp);
>>                  if (status) {
>>                          printk(KERN_ERR "dapl_path_comp_handler: "
>> -                              "ib_at_paths_by_route returned %d id %lld\n",
>> +                              "ib_at_paths_by_route returned %d id %lu\n",
>>                                 status, cm_ctx->dapl_comp.req_id);
>>                          event = DAT_CONNECTION_EVENT_BROKEN;
>>                          goto error;
>> @@ -413,7 +413,7 @@
>>                                        &cm_ctx->dapl_comp);
>>          if (status) {
>>                  printk(KERN_ERR "dapl_rt_comp_handler: ib_at_paths_by_route "
>> -                      "returned %d id %lld\n", status, cm_ctx->dapl_comp.req_id);
>> +                      "returned %d id %lu\n", status, cm_ctx->dapl_comp.req_id);
>>                  event = DAT_CONNECTION_EVENT_BROKEN;
>>                  goto error;
>
> This change yields the same warnings on x86_64 that you previously
> indicated and this fixes on ia64 :-(

Should we use %Lu for printing out the req_id (a u64)?