From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14517 invoked by alias); 27 Jan 2015 15:52:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 13879 invoked by uid 89); 27 Jan 2015 15:52:21 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 27 Jan 2015 15:49:38 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t0RFnYkv020080 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 27 Jan 2015 10:49:35 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t0RFnWhi030987; Tue, 27 Jan 2015 10:49:33 -0500 Message-ID: <54C7B38C.6090201@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 18:15:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Metzger, Markus T" CC: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/13] btrace, linux: add perf event buffer abstraction References: <1416480444-9943-1-git-send-email-markus.t.metzger@intel.com> <1416480444-9943-4-git-send-email-markus.t.metzger@intel.com> <54C773CE.8040708@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2015-01/txt/msg00724.txt.bz2 On 01/27/2015 03:31 PM, Metzger, Markus T wrote: >> Isn't there a better type to use here instead of "long long"? >> Why not size_t, if a host buffer size; uint64_t, if it's a fixed >> buffer format, assuming 64-bit here; or ULONGEST, the widest >> integer we support? > > I'm using the same data type as the respective fields in > struct perf_event_mmap_page (after resolving a few typedefs). > > I'm also fine to directly use __u64 or to use uint64_t. Ah, so fits in "fixed format" category. Let's go with uint64_t then. Thanks, Pedro Alves