From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id WFDXNFSyR2p6tCMAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 03 Jul 2026 09:00:04 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=simark.ca; s=mail; t=1783083604; bh=OMaTCzEkgV7TszWOytsLFVrxc6gICLk6/xGlJ/4ZND8=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From; b=tw9B3SQbk+6nndwXu0z/Shog4EbqNyNilpLUzfZ+tb1wb38AJTx0wLhkkZ/O1/1BG itQCPRQNSgIZmMTeo1kXuJfWX5ixWrhRWiUPX+hBdqdhEYSuVXEpiCyPO5l02CupC5 XqaA2LqtBAB1CFqj9R3sQtCxLBfq0aN4xFaLH5xM= Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id C0B881E024; Fri, 03 Jul 2026 09:00:04 -0400 (EDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.1 (2024-03-25) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.4 required=5.0 tests=ARC_SIGNED,ARC_VALID,BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=4.0.1 Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=simark.ca header.i=@simark.ca header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mail header.b=AO9YW/lY; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from vm01.sourceware.org (vm01.sourceware.org [IPv6:2620:52:6:3111::32]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange x25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D44D11E024 for ; Fri, 03 Jul 2026 09:00:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from vm01.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F04574BA2E27 for ; Fri, 3 Jul 2026 13:00:01 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org F04574BA2E27 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=simark.ca header.i=@simark.ca header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mail header.b=AO9YW/lY Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 345824BA2E1F for ; Fri, 3 Jul 2026 12:59:38 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 345824BA2E1F Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=simark.ca Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=simark.ca ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 345824BA2E1F Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=158.69.221.121 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1783083578; cv=none; b=UYEn8cMA6CkGRUHavDfypv6JM5fc11PbjAUAILVIn926mmooT77ZjRGe5Vxmd3Q9giqu1cdFiITPVNYfnJ454029mQXeMi6XAPj4hGMP+vc5KfkMzAx519Dd0YK5k0+cLOB+jlQ3pLw2zkoneIvWeAIul0qVtPQkt3gN5e6UbMI= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1783083578; c=relaxed/simple; bh=OMaTCzEkgV7TszWOytsLFVrxc6gICLk6/xGlJ/4ZND8=; h=DKIM-Signature:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:From; b=rCv7BRWml51YfK5qVMwEwq2Ot5DOjiWBszZjYv1OY2IuyDYzsflvriVDPk4Sxf/FULhqfoi1uswjRoEq91yXYQogYCljNW4pmNNufEVFxwSry5Qp/NUReHVkVnILsRHRap/A47BLtk18vAY76Tta/8Yssf2hcdnw9J+SER1UsbI= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; sourceware.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=simark.ca header.i=@simark.ca header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mail header.b=AO9YW/lY DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 345824BA2E1F DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=simark.ca; s=mail; t=1783083577; bh=OMaTCzEkgV7TszWOytsLFVrxc6gICLk6/xGlJ/4ZND8=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=AO9YW/lYGEmibK0Nmf9hWMX2jq0548I0GlcRwNj7vq45xXhRqUqOPagizyVfsAFhM 5I36ibIzW9jdq5g+amOfzVe12d+pcYquW6SlkD1TxozqYT6CZ9lJ9BCRBzpDJ5+jtr tO710pEHw8BbGWMrgohrFOhpAlh1Db+DHp9pWDo8= Received: by simark.ca (Postfix) id 587201E024; Fri, 03 Jul 2026 08:59:37 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2026 08:59:36 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb, amd-dbgapi-target: use PRIu64 and PRIu32 To: Tom Tromey , Lancelot SIX Cc: Tankut Baris Aktemur , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20260701142846.2566570-1-tankutbaris.aktemur@amd.com> <6ae6dd2b-9577-4711-a0c8-93663a28e997@amd.com> <87echlf8s5.fsf@tromey.com> Content-Language: fr From: Simon Marchi In-Reply-To: <87echlf8s5.fsf@tromey.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces~public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org On 7/2/26 4:15 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> Lancelot SIX writes: > >> Hi, >> Doesn't GDB have an implicit habit/policy not to use the PRI??? macros? > >> I do not mind them in amd-dbgapi-target.c, but want to make sure >> global maintainers are fine with this. > >> I guess the alternative is to use pulongest + %s instead of PRIu64. > >> i.e. something like this: > >> str += (agent_id != AMD_DBGAPI_AGENT_NONE >> ? string_printf (" %s", pulongest (agent_id.handle)) >> : "?"); > > I don't know if it's a policy exactly, but personally I prefer pulongest > et al, since I find the PRI* macros pretty ugly and unreadable. > > Tom On my side I have no problem with the PRI macros, I like to use the standard things where possible. Alternatively, we could start using fmt :) Simon