On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 10:46:34PM +0100, Felix Janda wrote:
> Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 08:59:35PM +0100, Felix Janda wrote:
> > > The uint*_t and int*_t are defined by C99 and should be prefered
> > > over the less portable __uint*_t and __int*_t variants. The
> > > necessary <stdint.h> include is in platformdefs.h, which gets
> > > included in most places via libxfs.h. In the public headers
> > > <stdint.h> is included in <xfs/xfs_types.h>.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Felix Janda <felix.janda@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > I can't apply this straight off. Most of the libxfs code that is
> > changed is shared with the kernel code, and so the definitions of
> > the variables need to be the same as the kernel code. There are
> > reasons for the kernel code using __[u]int*_t type variants (e.g. I
> > think the endian conversion static checker requires the __ variants
> > for host order variables), and so before making sweeping changes
> > like this we need to ensure that we can make the equivalent changes
> > to the kernel code as well...
>
> Thanks for the review!
>
> Sorry, I was not aware about this difference between the types.
>
> The simplest fix for musl would be to add defines or something similar
> to linux.h.
>
> On the other hand, on the long run it would be preferable to use
> the stdint types (consistently).
Right, that's definitely the better solution. We can't just jump
there in one go. :/
FWIW, changing everything outside libxfs/ and include/ should be ok
to do straight away; it's just the libxfs stuff that we have other
constraints on.
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
|