[PATCH v2] cxl: Add explicit precision specifiers

[Rasmus Villemoes]

C99 says that a precision given as simply '.' with no following digits
or * should be interpreted as 0. The kernel's printf implementation,
however, treats this case as if the precision was omitted. C99 also
says that if both the precision and value are 0, no digits should be
printed. Even if the kernel followed C99 to the letter, I don't think
that would be particularly useful in these cases. For consistency with
most other format strings in the file, use an explicit precision of 16
and add a 0x prefix.

Signed-off-by: Rasmus Villemoes <linux at rasmusvillemoes.dk>
---
What Joe said is of course technically true, but 24 of the %.16llx
matches are in drivers/misc/cxl/, so internal consistency wins.

 drivers/misc/cxl/irq.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/misc/cxl/irq.c b/drivers/misc/cxl/irq.c
index c8929c526691..4b73f4b9e7f1 100644
--- a/drivers/misc/cxl/irq.c
+++ b/drivers/misc/cxl/irq.c
@@ -147,7 +147,7 @@ static irqreturn_t cxl_irq(int irq, void *data, struct cxl_irq_info *irq_info)
 	if (dsisr & CXL_PSL_DSISR_An_PE)
 		return handle_psl_slice_error(ctx, dsisr, irq_info->errstat);
 	if (dsisr & CXL_PSL_DSISR_An_AE) {
-		pr_devel("CXL interrupt: AFU Error %.llx\n", irq_info->afu_err);
+		pr_devel("CXL interrupt: AFU Error 0x%.16llx\n", irq_info->afu_err);
 
 		if (ctx->pending_afu_err) {
 			/*
@@ -158,7 +158,7 @@ static irqreturn_t cxl_irq(int irq, void *data, struct cxl_irq_info *irq_info)
 			 * probably best that we log them somewhere:
 			 */
 			dev_err_ratelimited(&ctx->afu->dev, "CXL AFU Error "
-					    "undelivered to pe %i: %.llx\n",
+					    "undelivered to pe %i: 0x%.16llx\n",
 					    ctx->pe, irq_info->afu_err);
 		} else {
 			spin_lock(&ctx->lock);
-- 
2.1.3