linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] Many pages: Document fixed-width types with ISO C naming

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <c02a6b7e4f8e377178b25c30d544420906346816.camel@xry111.site>
Date:   Thu, 25 Aug 2022 16:09:42 +0800
From:   Xi Ruoyao <xry111@...111.site>
To:     Alejandro Colomar <alx.manpages@...il.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     linux-man <linux-man@...r.kernel.org>,
        Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
        Joseph Myers <joseph@...esourcery.com>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        Zack Weinberg <zackw@...ix.com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Alex Colomar <alx@...nel.org>,
        Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
        Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@...e.cz>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        GCC <gcc-patches@....gnu.org>, LTP List <ltp@...ts.linux.it>,
        Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
        glibc <libc-alpha@...rceware.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
        Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Many pages: Document fixed-width types with ISO C
 naming

On Thu, 2022-08-25 at 09:48 +0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> Hi Xi,
> 
> On 8/25/22 09:28, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> > On Thu, 2022-08-25 at 09:20 +0200, Alejandro Colomar via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> > > I don't know for sure, and I never pretended to say otherwise.  But what
> > > IMHO the kernel could do is to make the types compatible, by typedefing
> > > to the same fundamental types (i.e., long or long long) that user-space
> > > types do.
> > 
> > In user-space things are already inconsistent as we have multiple libc
> > implementations.  Telling every libc implementation to sync their
> > typedef w/o a WG14 decision will only cause "aggressive discussion" (far
> > more aggressive than this thread, I'd say).
> > 
> > If int64_t etc. were defined as builtin types since epoch, things would
> > be a lot easier.  But we can't change history.
> 
> This would be great.  I mean, the fundamental types should be u8, u16,
> ... and int, long, ... typedefs for these, and not the other way around, 
> if the language was designed today.
> 
> Maybe GCC could consider something like that.

GCC already have __UINT8_TYPE__ etc. but again telling all libc
implementations to use "typedef __UINT8_TYPE__ uint8_t" etc. will make
no effect expect annoying their maintainers.

-- 
Xi Ruoyao <xry111@...111.site>
School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University