Re: Can we drop upstream Linux x32 support?

Bernd Petrovitsch
2018-12-14T16:31:03Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2391 bytes --]

On 14/12/2018 17:17, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 03:13:10PM +0100, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
[..]
>> FWIW I have
>> ---- snip ----
>> #if defined __x86_64__
>> # if defined __ILP32__ // x32
>> # define PRI_time_t "lld" // for time_t
>> # define PRI_nsec_t "lld" // for tv_nsec in struct timespec
>> # else // x86_64
>> # define PRI_time_t "ld" // for time_t
>> # define PRI_nsec_t "ld" // for tv_nsec in struct timespec
>> # endif
>> #else // i[3-6]68
>> # define PRI_time_t "ld" // for time_t
>> # define PRI_nsec_t "ld" // for tv_nsec in struct timespec
>> #endif
>> ---- snip ----
>> in my userspace code for printf() and friends - I don't know how libc's
>> react to such a patch (and I don't care for the name of the macros as
>> long it's obviously clear for which type they are).
>> I assume/fear we won't get additional modifiers into the relevant
>> standards for libc types (as they are far more like pid_t, uid_t etc.).
>> And casting to u/intmaxptr_t to get a defined printf()-modifier doesn't
>> look appealing to me to "solve" such issues.
>
> This is all useless (and wrong since tv_nsec is required to have type
> long as part of C and POSIX, regardless of ILP32-vs-LP64; that's a bug

Thanks. OK, I didn't know that - and 32bit is enough to represent 1E9
(as a second won't have more nanosecs).
Hmm, can we fix that in the x32 world?
Sry, I'm not the expert on glibc vs ABI va syscall interface vs breakage
there though.

> in glibc's x32). Just do:
>
> printf("%jd", (intmax_t)t);
>
> Saving 2 or 3 insns (for sign or zero extension) around a call to
> printf is not going to make any measurable difference to performance

Until someone comes up with hardware with ASIC support for 1k bit int's
and (ab)uses intmax_t for that. SCNR ....

> or any significant difference to size, and it's immeasurably more
> readable than the awful PRI* macros and the
> adjacent-string-concatenation they rely on.

One gets used to the PRI_* macros over time (and there no calculated
format strings in my world) - and type casts are not better in my eyes ...

MfG,
Bernd
--
"I dislike type abstraction if it has no real reason. And saving
on typing is not a good reason - if your typing speed is the main
issue when you're coding, you're doing something seriously wrong."
- Linus Torvalds

[-- Attachment #2: pEpkey.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 2513 bytes --]