Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 18 Nov 2008 15:22:59 -0500 | From | "Michael Kerrisk" <> | Subject | Re: [patch] Fix type errors in inotify interfaces |
| |
I hope Robert doesn't mind if I drop a piece from our old offlist mail conversation into this thread, for some background.
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Use of uint32_t in inotify APIs Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 09:07:17 -0400 From: Robert Love <rlove@rlove.org>
On 6/20/06, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
Hi,
> The use of uint32_t seems a little strange in at least some of the > above. In particular, the watch descriptor returned by > inotify_add_watch() is an "int", as is the "wd" field of the > "inotify_event" structure, but in the prototype for inotify_rm_watch(), > "wd" is uint32_t. Is there a reason for this, or is it just cruft?
The unsigned parameter in inotify_rm_watch() is wrong. I cannot think we that should be the case. But the problem lies not with glibc -- the function definition in the kernel is wrong, too. It should be fixed; everywhere else a watch descriptor is an __s32.
> Following on from this, is it really necessary that "mask" is uint32_t > in the prototype for inotify_rm_watch()? In most other glibc > interfaces, bit masks are simply "int".
I think masks should be unsigned. This definitely makes sense.
In the kernel, most of the inotify data types are __u32.
[...]
Also the 'wd' in the event structure should be 'int32_t' -- the kernel uses the type '__s32' -- but perhaps glibc developers prefer to use a straight 'int' since the types are identical.
In that case, inotify_rm_watch()'s 'wd' should be changed to '__s32' in the kernel and 'int' in glibc. Otherwise, '__s32' in the kernel and 'int32_t' in glibc. Since this change will affect ABI, it needs to be made cautiously, but I don't see any issues.
Robert Love
| |