From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 7 06:11:31 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAA9D37B408; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 06:11:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.fokus.fraunhofer.de (mailhub.fokus.fraunhofer.de [193.174.154.14]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05F7043F85; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 06:11:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brandt@fokus.fraunhofer.de) Received: from beagle (beagle [193.175.132.100])h77DBMv26501; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 15:11:22 +0200 (MEST) Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 15:11:22 +0200 (CEST) From: Harti Brandt To: Bruce Evans In-Reply-To: <20030807222014.B1480@gamplex.bde.org> Message-ID: <20030807150151.I1640@beagle.fokus.fraunhofer.de> References: <200308061130.h76BUrPt029894@repoman.freebsd.org> <20030806162837.D622@beagle.fokus.fraunhofer.de> <20030807222014.B1480@gamplex.bde.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: Hartmut Brandt cc: Andrew Gallatin cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/en midway.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2003 13:11:32 -0000 On Thu, 7 Aug 2003, Bruce Evans wrote: BE>> On Wed, 6 Aug 2003, Andrew Gallatin wrote: BE>> BE>> AG>Hartmut Brandt [harti@FreeBSD.org] wrote: BE>> AG>> harti 2003/08/06 04:30:53 PDT BE>> AG>> BE>> AG>> FreeBSD src repository BE>> AG>> BE>> AG>> Modified files: BE>> AG>> sys/dev/en midway.c BE>> AG>> Log: BE>> AG>> Print an array index that is computed as ptrdiff_t with %tu. BE>> AG> BE>> AG>I don't understand why, but this breaks the sparc64 and alpha tinderboxes. BE>> AG>See BE>> AG>http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=574500+0+current/freebsd-current BE>> BE>> Not really. The breakage was earlier when the ptrdiff_t was printed via BE>> %d. David O'Brien fixed that by converting to long and using %ld. The BE>> above commit now uses the knowledge that the difference is actually an BE>> array index and therefor uses %tu. The tinderbox log file seems to be from BE>> yesterday before David's fix. BE> BE>It also uses the knowledge that the difference is non-negative. Why not BE>just print the difference as it is using the natural format %td? This BE>makes no difference if the, uhm, difference is non-negative, but avoids BE>undefined behaviour if the difference is somehow negative. By saying 'array index' I suppose the thing to be non-negative and lesser or equal the size of the array. Otherwise that wouldn't be a legal array index for the given array. Assuming that %tu seems the natural format for me. The point is, that sc->rxslot is a real C-array and vc->rxslot is a pointer to one of it's elements. Therefor the difference must be between 0 and the array size - 1. If it is not, well, there is a bigger problem than undefined printf behaviour, because that would mean that vc->rxslot points into the wild. Would the two pointers be arbitrary pointers to elements of the same array, yes, I would find %td more appropriate. harti BE>Printing -1 using %tu on i386's gives an interesting example of the BE>undefined behaviour that results when a negative value is printed using BE>an unsigned format. I expected the result UINT_MAX (2^32-1), but the BE>actual result is UINTMAX_MAX (2^64-1). This is because the implementation BE>represents numbers using "uintmax_t ujval" for the %tu and %td formats, BE>so it represents -1 as UINTMAX_MAX, and then it just prints this value. BE> BE>Bruce BE> -- harti brandt, http://www.fokus.fraunhofer.de/research/cc/cats/employees/hartmut.brandt/private brandt@fokus.fraunhofer.de, harti@freebsd.org