https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65446
--- Comment #4 from Eric Blake <eblake at redhat dot com> --- Arguably, "%u" with short should warn, while "%hu" with short should not. On the other hand, if I use "%hu" with int, it is unclear to me whether I should get a warning (the fact that I'm using %h to intentionally truncate the value before it is printed, even though %hu and %hd print different values, makes it hard to discern whether I have a mismatch). But this does mean that whatever changes are made to -Wformat-signedness, it should take into account the use of %h range-limiting vs. pre-integer-promotion types.
