On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 7:36 AM Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote: > > On 14.03.2024 00:23, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > Xen makes assumptions about the size of integer types on the various > > architectures. Document these assumptions. > > This all reads as if we required exact widths. Is that really the case?
At least one thing here is that *all compilers on the architecture* need to have the same idea. If not, we absolutely need to change "unsigned int" to "uint32_t" in any public interface. A second thing is not only assumptions about minimum number of bits, but about storage size and alignment. Again, if we don't assume that "unsigned int" is exactly 4 bytes, then we should go through and change it to "uint32_t" anywhere that the size or alignment matter. -George
