[PATCH] Fix function definition and declaration mismatch

[PATCH] Fix function definition and declaration mismatch

[dev.madaari]

From: Udit kumar agarwal <dev.madaari@gmail.com>

during the declaration of, let's say XXH32_init parameter type is
'unsigned int' while during the definition it is 'uint32_t'. Now, on
most desktop os, they are are usually same, however on some embedded
platforms, for example RTEMS which uses newlib as it's standard c library,
they both are different.
---
 crc/xxhash.h | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/crc/xxhash.h b/crc/xxhash.h
index 8850d20..9019089 100644
--- a/crc/xxhash.h
+++ b/crc/xxhash.h
@@ -107,9 +107,9 @@ XXH32() :
 // Advanced Hash Functions
 //****************************
 
-void*         XXH32_init   (unsigned int seed);
+void*         XXH32_init   (uint32_t seed);
 XXH_errorcode XXH32_update (void* state, const void* input, int len);
-unsigned int  XXH32_digest (void* state);
+uint32_t  XXH32_digest (void* state);
 
 /*
 These functions calculate the xxhash of an input provided in several small packets,
@@ -135,7 +135,7 @@ Memory will be freed by XXH32_digest().
 
 
 int           XXH32_sizeofState(void);
-XXH_errorcode XXH32_resetState(void* state, unsigned int seed);
+XXH_errorcode XXH32_resetState(void* state, uint32_t seed);
 
 #define       XXH32_SIZEOFSTATE 48
 typedef struct { long long ll[(XXH32_SIZEOFSTATE+(sizeof(long long)-1))/sizeof(long long)]; } XXH32_stateSpace_t;
@@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ use the structure XXH32_stateSpace_t, which will ensure that memory space is lar
 */
 
 
-unsigned int XXH32_intermediateDigest (void* state);
+uint32_t XXH32_intermediateDigest (void* state);
 /*
 This function does the same as XXH32_digest(), generating a 32-bit hash,
 but preserve memory context.
-- 
1.9.1

Re: [PATCH] Fix function definition and declaration mismatch

[Udit agarwal]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1951 bytes --]

Hi,
Just a ping ;) Does this patch sounds reasonable?
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 12:04 PM, <dev.madaari@gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Udit kumar agarwal <dev.madaari@gmail.com>
>
> during the declaration of, let's say XXH32_init parameter type is
> 'unsigned int' while during the definition it is 'uint32_t'. Now, on
> most desktop os, they are are usually same, however on some embedded
> platforms, for example RTEMS which uses newlib as it's standard c library,
> they both are different.
> ---
>  crc/xxhash.h | 8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/crc/xxhash.h b/crc/xxhash.h
> index 8850d20..9019089 100644
> --- a/crc/xxhash.h
> +++ b/crc/xxhash.h
> @@ -107,9 +107,9 @@ XXH32() :
>  // Advanced Hash Functions
>  //****************************
>
> -void*         XXH32_init   (unsigned int seed);
> +void*         XXH32_init   (uint32_t seed);
>  XXH_errorcode XXH32_update (void* state, const void* input, int len);
> -unsigned int  XXH32_digest (void* state);
> +uint32_t  XXH32_digest (void* state);
>
>  /*
>  These functions calculate the xxhash of an input provided in several
> small packets,
> @@ -135,7 +135,7 @@ Memory will be freed by XXH32_digest().
>
>
>  int           XXH32_sizeofState(void);
> -XXH_errorcode XXH32_resetState(void* state, unsigned int seed);
> +XXH_errorcode XXH32_resetState(void* state, uint32_t seed);
>
>  #define       XXH32_SIZEOFSTATE 48
>  typedef struct { long long ll[(XXH32_SIZEOFSTATE+(sizeof(long
> long)-1))/sizeof(long long)]; } XXH32_stateSpace_t;
> @@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ use the structure XXH32_stateSpace_t, which will
> ensure that memory space is lar
>  */
>
>
> -unsigned int XXH32_intermediateDigest (void* state);
> +uint32_t XXH32_intermediateDigest (void* state);
>  /*
>  This function does the same as XXH32_digest(), generating a 32-bit hash,
>  but preserve memory context.
> --
> 1.9.1
>
>


-- 
Regards,
Udit kumar agarwal
http://uditagarwal.in/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2790 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] Fix function definition and declaration mismatch

[Jens Axboe]

On 8/9/18 12:20 AM, Udit agarwal wrote:
> Hi,
> Just a ping ;) Does this patch sounds reasonable?

Yep totally reasonable, had some vacation which is why it took a little
longer. Applied.

-- 
Jens Axboe