From: Torsten Bögershausen <tboegi@web.de>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 15:43:13 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 08/12] fsmonitor: add a test tool to dump the index extension
Message-ID: <6f55efc4-96b2-7c53-7d54-ff5801697550@web.de>
In-Reply-To: <5438765b-3119-ef15-8635-932b8cba08d3@gmail.com>

On 2017-09-18 15:38, Ben Peart wrote:
> 
> 
> On 9/17/2017 4:02 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Ben Peart <benpeart@microsoft.com> writes:
>>
>>> diff --git a/t/helper/test-dump-fsmonitor.c b/t/helper/test-dump-fsmonitor.c
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 0000000000..482d749bb9
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/t/helper/test-dump-fsmonitor.c
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
>>> +#include "cache.h"
>>> +
>>> +int cmd_main(int ac, const char **av)
>>> +{
>>> +    struct index_state *istate = &the_index;
>>> +    int i;
>>> +
>>> +    setup_git_directory();
>>> +    if (do_read_index(istate, get_index_file(), 0) < 0)
>>> +        die("unable to read index file");
>>> +    if (!istate->fsmonitor_last_update) {
>>> +        printf("no fsmonitor\n");
>>> +        return 0;
>>> +    }
>>> +    printf("fsmonitor last update %"PRIuMAX"\n",
>>> istate->fsmonitor_last_update);
>>
>> After pushing this out and had Travis complain, I queued a squash on
>> top of this to cast the argument to (uintmax_t), like you did in an
>> earlier step (I think it was [PATCH 04/12]).
>>
> 
> Thanks. I'll update this to cast it as (uint64_t) as that is what get/put_be64
> use.  As far as I can tell they both map to the same thing (unsigned long long)
> so there isn't functional difference.
(Just to double-check): This is the way to print "PRIuMAX" correctly
 (on all platforms):

printf("fsmonitor last update %"PRIuMAX"\n",
 (uintmax_t)istate->fsmonitor_last_update);