Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] util: Introduce read_file() and read_file_long() function

On Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 12:12:48AM +0100, Stefano Brivio wrote:

On Wed, 15 Oct 2025 15:46:12 +1100 David Gibson wrote:

...

On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 11:50:53AM +0800, Yumei Huang wrote:

...

On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 7:28 AM David Gibson wrote:

...

On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 03:38:34PM +0800, Yumei Huang wrote:

...

Signed-off-by: Yumei Huang [snip] + * @path: Path to the sysctl file + * @fallback: Default value if file can't be read + * + * Return: Parameter value, fallback on failure +*/ +long read_file_long(const char *path, long fallback) +{ + char buf[32];

Rather than just using a semi-arbitrary 32 here, I'd suggest defining a new constant similar to UINT16_STRLEN. Except that's trickier for a type that doesn't have a known fixed width. Pity the C library doesn't have constants for these AFAICT.

I will just define a UINTMAX_STRLEN with (sizeof("2147483647")).

That's not quite right. - It should be INTMAX_STRLEN (signed), UINTMAX would be for the unsigned version - That assumes intmax_t is 32-bit which is probably not the case (it will be 64-bit, maybe even 128-bit on modern systems) - For signed cases, it's the minimum (negative) value that gives the longest possible string (for 32-bit, "-2147483648")

By the way, while it doesn't cover intmax_t explicitly, I think this is a pretty good resource as it covers most architectures supported by the Linux kernel (hence, most architectures we support):

https://wiki.debian.org/ArchitectureSpecificsMemo#Summary

Oh, nice, that is a very handy resource.

and judging from intmax_t(3type) I'd say that the sizeof(long double) column tells you how big intmax_t is.

Well, at least, that's the page I use to know which architectures I can use to check things when I suspect a type portability bug.

That's because 'long double' should always be the biggest "native" data type, that is, excluding __int128 or vectorised / SIMD types such as __m256i.

This part isn't true, alas. Theoretically speaking there's not necessarily any relation between the largest native integer type and the largest native float type. But more importantly, it's not true in practice: according to the table sizeof(long double) is 16 for amd64, but sizeof(intmax_t) is 8 empirically. I think sizeof(long long) is more likely to match sizeof(intmax_t), but I don't love relying on it. -- David Gibson (he or they) | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you, not the other way | around. http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson