linux-xfs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Felix Janda <felix.janda@posteo.de>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH xfsprogs 2/2] linux.h: Define xfs_off_t as int64_t
Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2016 10:38:52 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160806083852.GA26156@nyan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160805224439.GM16044@dastard>

Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 03:09:05PM +0200, Felix Janda wrote:
> > Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 10:02:41AM +0200, Felix Janda wrote:
> > > > Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 08:54:10AM +0200, Felix Janda wrote:
> > > > > > Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > > > > > On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 03:37:37PM +0200, Felix Janda wrote:
> > > > > > > > int64_t is guaranteed to have the correct size and signedness and is
> > > > > > > > always avaible because linux.h has a <inttypes.h> include.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Fixes compilation error "unkown type name 'off64_t'" on linux when the
> > > > > > > > public header <xfs.h> is included without _LARGEFILE64_SOURCE or
> > > > > > > > _GNU_SOURCE defined. This bug was introduced in commit
> > > > > > > > cb898f157f8410a03cf5f3400baa1df9e5eecd33.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I would much prefer to just define _LARGEFILE64_SOURCE in linux.h..
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Thanks for the suggestion, but that does not work if the system header
> > > > > > defining (or not) off64_t is included before the xfs headers.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Which, to me, is a build bug in whatever code is including the xfs
> > > > > headers.  Isn't it the responsibility of the build environment to
> > > > > ensure the dependencies of the libraries being used are correctly
> > > > > met?
> > > > 
> > > > Every program using the xfs header is supposed to know that (only on
> > > > linux) since commit cb898f157f8410a03cf5f3400baa1df9e5eecd33 it is
> > > > necessary to define _LARGEFILE64_SOURCE or _GNU_SOURCE?
> > > 
> > > Which, I'd say, most already do, because anything trying to use XFS
> > > ioctls needs to be 64 bit offset clean, even on 32 bit systems.  I
> > > don't see any problem with requiring it when including a header
> > > that exposes ioctl interfaces with 64 bit file size/offset fields
> > > in them....
> > 
> > The easiest way to be 64bit clean is to use _FILEOFFSET_BITS=64. Then
> > off_t is 64bit on all architectures and it is impossible to use 32bit
> > interfaces. However the type off64_t will still not be defined...
> > 
> > (On the other hand, when just using _LARGEFILE64_SOURCE it is still
> > easy to mix 32 and 64bit interfaces.)
> 
> Which, with library code, we are likely to see applications using.
> 
> If you want to clean this up, then remove the dependence on
> _LARGEFILE64_SOURCE in the entire xfsprogs code base (e.g. it uses
> lseek64 everywhere which requires off64_t to be defined) and instead
> make it dependent on _FILEOFFSET_BITS=64. Then you can get rid of
> all the uses of off64_t completely, and we can break the build if
> _FILEOFFSET_BITS != 64 on inclusion of xfs.h.

Yes, I'd like to clean this up.

But first note that you can have both _FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 and
_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE. Then everything (off64_t, lseek64, ...) is
defined and everything (off_t, lseek, ...) is 64bit.

So to clean up I would first get _FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 defined and then
start "removing 64" from functions/types in any order. *Before
modifying the public headers* the sizeof(off_t)=8 check needs to
be put into xfs.h.

Also note that there are 3 different (but equivalent) off_t types
currently used in the code base: off64_t, loff_t and xfs_off_t.
Should these be converted to xfs_off_t or off_t?

Still, doing these type conversions is going to be pretty invasive
and is not unlikely to conflict with outstanding patches. Is now
a good time for this? (How about the __uint -> uint, __int -> int
conversion?)

Thanks,
Felix

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  reply	other threads:[~2016-08-06  8:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-07-30 13:37 [PATCH xfsprogs 2/2] linux.h: Define xfs_off_t as int64_t Felix Janda
2016-07-30 16:36 ` Eric Sandeen
2016-08-01  6:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-08-01  6:54   ` Felix Janda
2016-08-04  0:47     ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-05  8:02       ` Felix Janda
2016-08-05 11:52         ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-05 13:09           ` Felix Janda
2016-08-05 22:44             ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-06  8:38               ` Felix Janda [this message]
2016-08-06  9:13                 ` Felix Janda
2016-08-06 23:18                 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-07  7:09                   ` Felix Janda

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=20160806083852.GA26156@nyan \
    --to=felix.janda@posteo.de \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).