On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 6:25 PM, Benjamin Kaduk <ka...@mit.edu> wrote: > On Mon, 16 Nov 2015, Warner Losh wrote: > >> > >> > On Nov 15, 2015, at 9:13 PM, Justin Hibbits <chmeeed...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > (Attempted to send this yesterday, but appears it didn't go through. >> > Apologies if it really did go through). >> > >> > As part of a project getting FreeBSD on the Freescale P5020 SoC, I >> > increased the width of resources, from u_long(32 bits on 32-bit archs, 64 >> > bits on 64-bit archs) to uintmax_t (currently 64 bits on all archs). I >> > have it working on PowerPC, but have not tested it on any other >> > architecture, I have no other systems to test it with, so I need help. >> > This passes a tinderbox build. I need this tested on other archs, the >> > more the better, especially i386, including PAE. >> > >> > It should be effectively a no-op on most architectures, especially 64-bit >> > archs, though there were some checks I found in x86 code clamping address >> > checks to under 4GB, commented as necessary purely for rman. If this >> > isn't the case, and we can't yet handle the checks being removed, they can >> > go in, but that needs testing. It should apply cleanly to recent head. >> >> I like the idea. There’s nothing offensive enough in the diffs to comment >> upon here (though I suppose I could see a few spots one could quibble over >> if one were so inclined). >> >> I wonder, though, why not make its own typedef, even if it is just >> ‘typedef man_res_t uintmax_t;’ in the rman headers? > > Channeling my inner bde (maybe?), the typedef is probably helpful, but > uintmax_t seems less so. uintmax_t has no guaranteed ABI, so a > fixed-width type like uint64_t seems beter, assuming that uintmax_t is > currently uint64_t everywhere (which I think is the case but did not > verify). > > -Ben
I'm not opposed to a typedef for this, bde suggested I just use straight uintmax_t, so it's a good starting point for wider testing. I'm fine with anything as long as it's guaranteed to be the largest integer size (uintmax_t guarantees that, so any typedef of that is sufficient for me). Any name suggestions are appreciated, but what I want more than that right now is testing. Hammer the hell out of this on as wide a variety of platforms as anyone can, to make sure it doesn't break in odd cases. If typedefs are desired, it's no more work than a simple sed plus a single added line. If this breaks anything, that's the bigger problem. - Justin _______________________________________________ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
