| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 07:53:51 -0400 From: Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@....com> To: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx> Cc: Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>, LKML Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>, david@...g.hm, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: Userspace compiler support of "long long" On Jun 27, 2007, at 23:57:54, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 06:30:52PM -0400, Kyle Moffett wrote: >> Then all 64-bit archs have: >> typedef signed long __s64; >> typedef unsigned long __u64; >> >> While all 32-bit archs have: >> typedef signed long long __s64; >> typedef unsigned long long __u64; > > include/asm-parisc/types.h:typedef unsigned long long __u64; > > For both 32 and 64-bit. > > include/asm-sh64/types.h:typedef unsigned long long __u64; > include/asm-x86_64/types.h:typedef unsigned long long __u64; > > So that's three architectures that violate your first assertion. Oh, ok, that makes it even easier to say this with certainty: Changing the other 64-bit archs to use "long long" for their 64-bit numbers will not cause additional warnings. I'm also almost certain there are no architectures which use "long long" for 128-bit integers. (Moreover, I can't find hardly anything which does 128-bit integers at all). Cheers, Kyle Moffett - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists