-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 163
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add definition of enum storage type #209
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
riscv-elf.md
Outdated
`enum` types use int as storage type if the value range fits into the value | ||
range of signed int or into the value range of unsigned int. If the value | ||
range is larger, they use long long as storage type. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'd put this just below char and bool above as they all relate to integral types, rather than interspersed between float-related things (float16 and complex).
Also, is long long correct, or should it be "smallest primitive integer type" so long gets used on RV32? Using unsigned int is a bit weird potentially too, would have to see what other ABIs do here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I tested both on ARM 32bit and riscv64:
GCC uses 32 bit storage with 32bit alignment if the enum values are either
- in [0, 2^32-1] or
- in [-2^31, 2^31-1]
Otherwise a 64 bit storage with 64bit alignment is chosen.
If the values do not fit into a 64bit representation this results in a "warning: enumeration values exceed range of largest integer".
I don't have an RV32 compiler but I would assume that GCC does the same as on ARM 32bit.
So long long seems to be correct.
Concerning the placement of the paragraph I have no preferences. Shall I resubmit with the same text? Or will you relocate when merging?
For testing on riscv32 you could use this program:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <limits.h>
enum e1 {
A1 = 0,
B1 = 0x7FFFFFFF,
};
enum e2 {
A2 = 0,
B2 = 0xFFFFFFFF,
};
enum e3 {
A3 = -0x80000000,
B3 = 0x7FFFFFFF,
};
enum e4 {
A4 = 0,
B4 = 0xFFFFFFFF,
};
enum e5 {
A5 = 0,
B5 = 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF,
};
enum e6 {
A6 = -0x8000000000000000,
B6 = 0x7FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF,
};
enum e7 {
A7 = 0,
B7 = 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF,
};
enum e8 {
A8 = -0x8000000000000000,
B8 = 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF,
};
int main()
{
printf("e1: %zu, %zu\n", sizeof(enum e1), __alignof__(enum e1));
printf("e2: %zu, %zu\n", sizeof(enum e2), __alignof__(enum e2));
printf("e3: %zu, %zu\n", sizeof(enum e3), __alignof__(enum e3));
printf("e4: %zu, %zu\n", sizeof(enum e4), __alignof__(enum e4));
printf("e5: %zu, %zu\n", sizeof(enum e5), __alignof__(enum e5));
printf("e6: %zu, %zu\n", sizeof(enum e6), __alignof__(enum e6));
printf("e7: %zu, %zu\n", sizeof(enum e7), __alignof__(enum e7));
printf("e8: %zu, %zu\n", sizeof(enum e8), __alignof__(enum e8));
return 0;
}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oops, I meant long on RV64, as that's sufficient for 64 bits. I realise it'll be a 64-bit type, but that doesn't tell you if it uses long or long long when the two have the same representation (which matters for printf format strings, C++ name mangling, overloaded functions, ...).
Using Clang is easiest, one compiler does everything. But godbolt.org has RV32+RV64 Clang+GCC.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
On riscv64 %lx is required for printing. On armv7 only %llx delivers the correct output with GCC while %lx and %x are accepted but the output seems to be an address.
So the 64 bit types should be long on riscv64 and long long on riscv32.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok, so it is indeed the lowest rank integer type whose range is large enough to represent it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@jrtc27 I pushed a revised path some time ago. Could you, please, review.
Some APIs use enum types in their definitions. The C specification does not define the size of the integer type used for storing and passing enum type variables. Provide a definition matching GCC's default behavior. Signed-off-by: Heinrich Schuchardt <[email protected]>
`enum` types use `int` as storage type if the value range fits into the value | ||
range of `signed int` or into the value range of `unsigned int`. If the value | ||
range is larger, the enum values use an 64bit integer storage type: | ||
|
||
* `long` for an LP64 calling convention, | ||
* `long long` for an ILP32 calling convention. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This needs to actually specify the signedness of the types explicitly, not just that it uses an int's worth of space, as it affects things like C++ overloading. That is, it needs to be clearly:
- If it fits in an int, use int
- Else, if it fits in an unsigned int, use unsigned int
- Else, if it fits in a long (long), use long (long)
- Else use unsigned long (long)
(assuming that the long (long) case mirrors the int case in its choice of signedness)
LGTM, @jrtc27 feel free to merge that once you are OK. |
Some APIs use enum types in their definitions. The C specification does not
define the size of the integer type used for storing and passing enum type
variables.
Provide a definition matching GCC's default behavior.
Signed-off-by: Heinrich Schuchardt [email protected]