Possible problem with malloc_free_space using ss-20021007?

[joel.sherrill at OARcorp.com (Joel Sherrill)]

Bob Wisdom wrote:
> 
> Its a shame I can't type in red to show my embarrassment!
> My poor use of the format string combined with my ageing eyesight turned the
> "l" into a "1" and that is indeed how I got the wrong result. The numbers
> are looking much more real now with the correct format string.....
> Thank you very much for your attention to detail (Daniel), and apologies to
> all (especially Joel) for any time wasted on this one.

Don't fret over it.  We all make those types of mistakes some times. :)

> Bob

> Kind regards to all.
> Bob Wisdom (UK)
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Daniel N?ri" <daniel.neri at sigicom.se>
> To: <rtems-users at oarcorp.com>
> Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 3:12 PM
> Subject: Re: Possible problem with malloc_free_space using ss-20021007?
> 
> > "Bob Wisdom" <bobwis=2FQen6wEnzTQXOPxS62xeg at public.gmane.org> writes:
> >
> > > Further to my last post on stack check reporting possibly going wrong I
> have
> > > another one to add:-
> > > printf("malloc free space = %xl\n",(unsigned long)malloc_free_space());
> > > seems to give unreal numbers..
> >
> > Note that the correct format string is actually "%lx". But I suppose
> > sizeof(int) == sizeof(long) == sizeof(size_t) here, so it should not
> > matter...
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >    --Daniel
> >
> >

-- 
Joel Sherrill, Ph.D.             Director of Research & Development
joel at OARcorp.com                 On-Line Applications Research
Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS  Huntsville AL 35805
   Support Available             (256) 722-9985