>>> On 01.08.16 at 18:08, <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote: > On 01/08/16 16:51, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 01.08.16 at 15:14, <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> 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@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
