[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 32-bit profiling counts?
From: |
Andrew J. Schorr |
Subject: |
Re: 32-bit profiling counts? |
Date: |
Sat, 6 Jun 2020 14:47:27 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Sat, Jun 06, 2020 at 01:23:27PM -0500, Peter Lindgren wrote:
> I was originally running on a Raspberry Pi 2 Model B Rev 1.1, which has a
> 32-bit ARM Cortex-A7 processor. The OS is “Raspberry Pi OS”, which is
> basically Debian Buster with a different desktop look and feel. I was using
> gawk as installed by "sudo apt install gawk", which is as up-to-date as
> Debian provides there:
OK. That makes sense that "long" is 32 bits on a 32-bit CPU.
> Given that “long” is a slippery quantity - sometimes 32-bit, sometimes 64-bit
> - depending on the platform, perhaps these counts should be defined as “long
> long”, or int64_t, or even uint64_t, which would be 64-bits everywhere.
Yup, that's the question: could we change that "long" to int64_t or uint64_t
and would that break other parts of the code and what would it do to platform
portability? I can make either of those changes on my system and still
pass "make check", but I don't know how it would impact other platforms.
Regards,
Andy
- Re: 32-bit profiling counts?, (continued)
- Re: 32-bit profiling counts?, Wolfgang Laun, 2020/06/06
- Re: 32-bit profiling counts?, Andrew J. Schorr, 2020/06/06
- Re: 32-bit profiling counts?, arnold, 2020/06/07
- Re: 32-bit profiling counts?, Wolfgang Laun, 2020/06/07
- Re: 32-bit profiling counts?, Andrew J. Schorr, 2020/06/07
- Re: 32-bit profiling counts?, arnold, 2020/06/08
- Re: 32-bit profiling counts?, Andrew J. Schorr, 2020/06/08
- Re: 32-bit profiling counts?, arnold, 2020/06/09
- Re: 32-bit profiling counts?, Andrew J. Schorr, 2020/06/10
Re: 32-bit profiling counts?, Peter Lindgren, 2020/06/06
- Re: 32-bit profiling counts?,
Andrew J. Schorr <=