From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Clemens Ladisch <clemens@ladisch.de>
Subject: Re: portability: types
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 09:45:56 +0100
Message-ID: <56D010C4.3000804@ladisch.de>
References: <20160218154744.GA7454@danbala.tuwien.ac.at>
 <s5hy4ait3t8.wl-tiwai@suse.de>
 <20160223140906.GP19194@danbala.tuwien.ac.at>
 <s5h4mczzals.wl-tiwai@suse.de>
 <20160224131655.GA22682@danbala.tuwien.ac.at>
 <sfid-H20160224-163730-+070.31-1@spamfilter.osbf.lua>
 <s5h8u2adssb.wl-tiwai@suse.de>
 <20160225233124.GA13672@danbala.tuwien.ac.at>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org>
Received: from dehamd003.servertools24.de (dehamd003.servertools24.de
 [31.47.254.18]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6D3D261498
 for <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>; Fri, 26 Feb 2016 09:45:59 +0100 (CET)
In-Reply-To: <20160225233124.GA13672@danbala.tuwien.ac.at>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/options/alsa-devel>,
 <mailto:alsa-devel-request@alsa-project.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mailman.alsa-project.org/pipermail/alsa-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>
List-Help: <mailto:alsa-devel-request@alsa-project.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel>,
 <mailto:alsa-devel-request@alsa-project.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org
Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org
To: Thomas Klausner <tk@giga.or.at>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org
List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org

Thomas Klausner wrote:
> The next big issue is that multiple places include Linux specific
> header files, easily recognizable by the path linux/*.h.

Once upon a time, alsa-lib was used only on Linux (and also on old
versions such as 2.2.x).

> I think these are used to define unusual types like __u32, __u64,
> __kernel_off_t, __kernel_pid_t. There are also a number of cases of
> u_xxx_t (which don't exist on Solaris) vs. the uxxx_t defined in C99.
>
> Many of these types have POSIX equivalents, like uint32_t, uint64_t,
> off_t, pid_t.
>
> Would it be better to switch to those, or should we define compat
> #typedefs or #defines in local.h?

Linux-specific types should be used only in code that actually is
Linux specific (i.e., the xxx_hw plugins).


Regards,
Clemens