Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/3] xen/types: Correct the definition of uintptr_t

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 01.08.16 at 18:08, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 01/08/16 16:51, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 01.08.16 at 15:14, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> uintptr_t is specified as unsigned int in 32bit, not unsigned long.  This is
>>> why, when copying inttypes.h from GCC, the use of PRIxPTR and similar is
>>> broken for 32bit builds.
>> I don't think this is strictly the case, i.e. doing it this way still ties
>> us to internal workings of the compiler (as there is room for targets
>> to customize base types used for derived ones). Could you try
>> whether ...
> 
> This is the entire point I am trying to make that what we are doing is
> currently unsafe if we are not using the header files to match the
> compiler in use.

That's really only a problem if we don't use what the compiler
provides us to make up those header clones of ours, like e.g. (as
said) the mode attribute.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel