linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] lib: vsprintf: Add %pa format specifier for phys_addr

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

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 06 Feb 2013 22:39:39 -0600
From:	Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>
To:	Stepan Moskovchenko <stepanm@...eaurora.org>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	George Spelvin <linux@...izon.com>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
	Andrei Emeltchenko <andrei.emeltchenko@...el.com>,
	mingo@...nel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	Stepan Moskovchenko <stepanm@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] lib: vsprintf: Add %pa format specifier for
 phys_addr_t types

On 01/22/2013 06:14:53 PM, Stepan Moskovchenko wrote:
> Add the %pa format specifier for printing a phys_addr_t
> type and its derivative types (such as resource_size_t),
> since the physical address size on some platforms can vary
> based on build options, regardless of the native integer
> type.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stepan Moskovchenko <stepanm@...eaurora.org>

Ok, I know I'm late to the party, but doesn't LP64 apply here? Are we  
really capable of building on a target where "long" and "pointer" are  
different sizes? Last I checked the kernel was full of that assumption  
because there was an actual standard and we demanded that the compiler  
building us comply with it, just like MacOS X and the BSDs do:

Standard:
http://www.unix.org/whitepapers/64bit.html

Rationale:
http://www.unix.org/version2/whatsnew/lp64_wp.html

Insane legacy reasons Windows decided to be "special":
http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archive/2005/01/31/363790.aspx

Thus "unsigned long" should by definition be big enough. Using unsigned  
long long means you're doing 64 bit math on 32 bit targets for no  
apparent reason.

What did I miss?

Rob--
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/