From: Bernd Schubert <bernd@bsbernd.com>
To: "David Laight" <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>,
"Thomas Weißschuh" <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] fuse: uapi: use UAPI types
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2026 14:46:02 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <deff86e1-f124-4e5d-9313-d7339bcc664a@bsbernd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260109131134.7aba4acf@pumpkin>
On 1/9/26 14:11, David Laight wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Jan 2026 11:55:30 +0100
> Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jan 09, 2026 at 11:45:33AM +0100, Bernd Schubert wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/9/26 11:38, David Laight wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 9 Jan 2026 09:11:28 +0100
>>>> Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Jan 08, 2026 at 11:12:29PM +0100, Bernd Schubert wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/5/26 13:09, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 5, 2026, at 09:50, Bernd Schubert wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>>>>> I don't think we'll find a solution that won't break somewhere,
>>>>>>> and using the kernel-internal types at least makes it consistent
>>>>>>> with the rest of the kernel headers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If we can rely on compiling with a modern compiler (any version of
>>>>>>> clang, or gcc-4.5+), it predefines a __UINT64_TYPE__ macro that
>>>>>>> could be used for custom typedef:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> #ifdef __UINT64_TYPE__
>>>>>>> typedef __UINT64_TYPE__ fuse_u64;
>>>>>>> typedef __INT64_TYPE__ fuse_s64;
>>>>>>> typedef __UINT32_TYPE__ fuse_u32;
>>>>>>> typedef __INT32_TYPE__ fuse_s32;
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> #else
>>>>>>> #include <stdint.h>
>>>>>>> typedef uint64_t fuse_u64;
>>>>>>> typedef int64_t fuse_s64;
>>>>>>> typedef uint32_t fuse_u32;
>>>>>>> typedef int32_t fuse_s32;
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> #endif
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I personally like this version.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ack, I'll use this. Although I am not sure why uint64_t and __UINT64_TYPE__
>>>>> should be guaranteed to be identical.
>>>>
>>>> Indeed, on 64bit the 64bit types could be 'long' or 'long long'.
>>>> You've still got the problem of the correct printf format specifier.
>>>> On 32bit the 32bit types could be 'int' or 'long'.
>>>>
>>>> stdint.h 'solves' the printf issue with the (horrid) PRIu64 defines.
>>>> But I don't know how you find out what gcc's format checking uses.
>>>> So you might have to cast all the values to underlying C types in
>>>> order pass the printf format checks.
>>>> At which point you might as well have:
>>>> typedef unsigned int fuse_u32;
>>>> typedef unsigned long long fuse_u64;
>>>> _Static_assert(sizeof (fuse_u32) == 4 && sizeof (fuse_u64) == 8);
>>>> And then use %x and %llx in the format strings.
>>
>> These changes to format strings are what we are trying to avoid.
>
> Where do PRIu64 (and friends) come from if you don't include stdint.h ?
> I think Linux kernel always uses 'int' and 'long long', but other
> compilation environments might use 'long' for one of them [1].
> So while you can define ABI correct PRIu64 and PRIu32 you can't define
> ones that pass compiler format checking without knowing the underlying
> C types.
libfuse uses PRIu64 and it make heavy usage of stdint.h in general, I
don't think building it in that no-libc environment would work. But that
doesn't mean the header couldn't be included in another lib that works
differently.
Thanks,
Bernd
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-09 13:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-30 12:10 [PATCH v2] fuse: uapi: use UAPI types Thomas Weißschuh
2025-12-30 21:09 ` Arnd Bergmann
2026-01-02 22:27 ` Bernd Schubert
2026-01-03 12:44 ` Bernd Schubert
2026-01-05 8:40 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2026-01-05 8:50 ` Bernd Schubert
2026-01-05 9:57 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2026-01-05 12:09 ` Arnd Bergmann
2026-01-08 22:12 ` Bernd Schubert
2026-01-09 8:11 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2026-01-09 10:38 ` David Laight
2026-01-09 10:45 ` Bernd Schubert
2026-01-09 10:55 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2026-01-09 11:36 ` Bernd Schubert
2026-01-09 13:11 ` David Laight
2026-01-09 13:46 ` Bernd Schubert [this message]
2026-01-09 19:13 ` David Laight
2026-01-08 22:14 ` Bernd Schubert
2026-01-03 14:10 ` David Laight
2026-01-03 16:47 ` Bernd Schubert
2026-01-05 12:45 ` Miklos Szeredi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=deff86e1-f124-4e5d-9313-d7339bcc664a@bsbernd.com \
--to=bernd@bsbernd.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox