On my 64bit system, I get warnings about casting int to pointer of different size and vice versa. However, below patch only shifts the warnings to 32bit systems, right?
Should we encapsulate in some #ifdef __i386__ or is there an always-native int type?
Thanks ~Neels
From f25f8cebb58ad1f5241a33d9bac76654cd2a68a2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Neels Hofmeyr nhofmeyr@sysmocom.de Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 19:31:33 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] remove warning on 64bit, add warning on i386?
--- openbsc/src/osmo-bsc/osmo_bsc_vty.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/openbsc/src/osmo-bsc/osmo_bsc_vty.c b/openbsc/src/osmo-bsc/osmo_bsc_vty.c index d871f01..1e4e6ee 100644 --- a/openbsc/src/osmo-bsc/osmo_bsc_vty.c +++ b/openbsc/src/osmo-bsc/osmo_bsc_vty.c @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ static struct osmo_bsc_data *osmo_bsc_data(struct vty *vty)
static struct osmo_msc_data *osmo_msc_data(struct vty *vty) { - return osmo_msc_data_find(bsc_gsmnet, (int) vty->index); + return osmo_msc_data_find(bsc_gsmnet, (int)(long int) vty->index); }
static struct cmd_node bsc_node = { @@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ DEFUN(cfg_net_msc, cfg_net_msc_cmd, return CMD_WARNING; }
- vty->index = (void *) index; + vty->index = (void *)(long int) index; vty->node = MSC_NODE; return CMD_SUCCESS; }
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 08:07:21PM +0100, Neels Hofmeyr wrote:
On my 64bit system, I get warnings about casting int to pointer of different size and vice versa. However, below patch only shifts the warnings to 32bit systems, right?
I don't think so. 'long' typically corresponds to the pointer size, at least based on my experience. Of course the C standard doesn't give you any guarantees and just states that it should be at least the size of a signed 32bit integer.
according to page 6 of http://www.agner.org/optimize/calling_conventions.pdf the only practical exception seems to be windows, where on 64bit even a 'long' is only 32bit ;)
The more interesting question is probably why is vty->index not pointing to 'struct osmo_msc_data' in the first place? That's what we typically use, rather than storing integers in the pointer and then perfomring lookups on that. Holger?
On 24 Feb 2016, at 23:38, Harald Welte laforge@gnumonks.org wrote:
The more interesting question is probably why is vty->index not pointing to 'struct osmo_msc_data' in the first place? That's what we typically use, rather than storing integers in the pointer and then perfomring lookups on that. Holger?
I don't remember why I wanted to work with numbers. We can use the pointer to the struct.
holger
Hi
On 24.02.2016 20:07, Neels Hofmeyr wrote:
On my 64bit system, I get warnings about casting int to pointer of different size and vice versa. However, below patch only shifts the warnings to 32bit systems, right?
Should we encapsulate in some #ifdef __i386__ or is there an always-native int type?
What about using uintptr_t from stdint.h ?
Jacob
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 11:38:36PM +0100, Harald Welte wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 08:07:21PM +0100, Neels Hofmeyr wrote:
On my 64bit system, I get warnings about casting int to pointer of different size and vice versa. However, below patch only shifts the warnings to 32bit systems, right?
· I don't think so. 'long' typically corresponds to the pointer size, at least based on my experience. Of course the C standard doesn't give you any guarantees and just states that it should be at least the size of a signed 32bit integer. · according to page 6 of http://www.agner.org/optimize/calling_conventions.pdf the only practical exception seems to be windows, where on 64bit even a 'long' is only 32bit ;)
can't do that then, can we ;)
On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 10:03:21AM +0100, Jacob wrote:
What about using uintptr_t from stdint.h ?
stdint.h:typedef unsigned long int uintptr_t;
So that would work indeed. I'd have interpreted the name to mean unsigned int* but it seems to be made for this specific case.
But I agree that the case per se is still odd:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 11:38:36PM +0100, Harald Welte wrote:
The more interesting question is probably why is vty->index not pointing to 'struct osmo_msc_data' in the first place? That's what we typically use, rather than storing integers in the pointer and then perfomring lookups on that. Holger?
/me escalating to hfreyther
~Neels
-
Harald Welte -
Holger Freyther -
Jacob -
Neels Hofmeyr