[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fb57172d-9268-6aaf-1ba1-fa42a2a47c03@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2021 11:17:28 +0100
From: "Alejandro Colomar (man-pages)" <alx.manpages@...il.com>
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>, Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@...e.cz>
Cc: linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
GNU C Library <libc-alpha@...rceware.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
LTP List <ltp@...ts.linux.it>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] uapi: Make __{u,s}64 match {u,}int64_t in userspace
On 11/23/21 20:50, Florian Weimer via Libc-alpha wrote:
> * Cyril Hrubis:
>
>> As far as I can tell the userspace bits/types.h does exactly the same
>> check in order to define uint64_t and int64_t, i.e.:
>>
>> #if __WORDSIZE == 64
>> typedef signed long int __int64_t;
>> typedef unsigned long int __uint64_t;
>> #else
>> __extension__ typedef signed long long int __int64_t;
>> __extension__ typedef unsigned long long int __uint64_t;
>> #endif
>>
>> The macro __WORDSIZE is defined per architecture, and it looks like the
>> defintions in glibc sources in bits/wordsize.h match the uapi
>> asm/bitsperlong.h. But I may have missed something, the code in glibc is
>> not exactly easy to read.
>
> __WORDSIZE isn't exactly a standard libc macro.
The (to-be) standard libc macro would be LONG_WIDTH (although it has a
slightly different meaning, but it can be used for this, but then the
code also needs to expose <limits.h>), rigth?
Regards,
Alex
--
Alejandro Colomar
Linux man-pages comaintainer; https://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists