Le 25/03/2019 à 16:22, Wayne Stambaugh a écrit : > On 3/24/2019 2:34 PM, Seth Hillbrand wrote: >> Am 2019-03-24 13:23, schrieb Jon Evans: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Another question from this forum thread: >>> https://forum.kicad.info/t/before-giving-up-on-kicad-one-last-attempt-erc-misery/15933/67 >>> >>> >>> timestamp_t is defined as "long", with a note that swig can't handle >>> int32_t. >> >> I don't understand this comment. SWIG includes stdint.i which >> explicitly defines the exact integral types. Maybe Jeff can shed some >> light here? >> >> >>> This means that timestamp_t will be 32-bit on many platforms, but >>> 64-bit on Linux and MacOS running on 64-bit hardware. Apparently >>> there is at least one bug here involving the Eagle importer writing >>> out library files with 64-bit timestamps, which 32-bit KiCad cannot >>> open. >> >> This is a problem in ParseHex(). If it gets a hex value that overflows, >> it throws an error, stopping the processing. So this isn't specific to >> the Eagle plugin but rather a 32-bit/64-bit issue. We allow 64-bit to >> be written to file but only generate a time_t (32-bit) value for new, >> internal stamps. >> >> The Eagle processor creates its own "timestamp" by hash which is 64 bits >> on a 64 bit machine. > > Do you mean our Eagle plugins are not truncating 64 bit time stamps in > Eagle files? If so, the problem needs to be fixed here. AFAIK, KiCad > has always used 32 bit time stamps.
The issue is the fact the legacy plugin currently uses a long as time stamp, but do not truncate if to 32 bits when writing a .sch file. So because Eagle importer generate a long value, the legacy plugin writes 8 hexa chars on 32 bits platform, but can write more than 8 chars on 64 bits platforms > >> >>> Q1: Is there actually a bug here? maybe someone more familiar with the >>> Eagle importer can take a look. >> >> Yes. Definitely bug. We should be trimming the hash-based timestamp to >> 32-bits. > > You would also have to add checking for duplicate time stamps due to the > truncation of the upper 32 bits. > >> >>> Q2: Shouldn't we change the type of timestamp_t to be either "int" (if >>> we want it to be 32-bit) or "long long" (if we want it to be 64-bit)? >> >> I think 32-bits is the correct way to go here and using uint32_t should >> work but I may be missing an important detail. >> >>> My first thought is that we should change timestamp_t to be 32-bit on >>> all platforms, but I'm not sure the best way to handle existing files >>> that have been written out with 64-bit timestamps. >> >> This is problematic. I think we could patch the reader to handle 64-bit >> values but store 32-bit. >> >> -Seth I have a fix for that (it forces 32 bits in timestamp_t and allows 64 bits when reading a file). Annotation should already take care of duplicate timestamps (and replace duplicates if any) unless bug. The right fix is to use uint32_t for timestamps, at least for the current file format. @Jeff, you added a comment in common.h about an issue with Swig. What is this issue you encountered when using uint32_t as typedef for timestamp_t with swig (I did not see an issue during my tests)? -- Jean-Pierre CHARRAS _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
