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 11:13:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160806091301.GA4074@nyan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160806083852.GA26156@nyan>
Felix Janda wrote:
> 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
Actually I just noticed that xfsprogs has had _FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64
defined for linux (the only platform where this is necessary) since
the beginning of xfsprogs-dev git history.
Felix
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-06 9:13 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
2016-08-06 9:13 ` Felix Janda [this message]
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=20160806091301.GA4074@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).