From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: [PATCH,RFC] ext3: Add support for non-native signed/unsigned htree hash algorithms Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 11:25:29 -0700 Message-ID: <49021319.4050302@goop.org> References: <1224560624-9691-1-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <1224560624-9691-2-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <20081022172221.c1a8c5b5.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20081023025646.GD10369@mit.edu> <20081023192618.GS3184@webber.adilger.int> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Theodore Tso , Andrew Morton , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Andreas Dilger Return-path: Received: from gw.goop.org ([64.81.55.164]:54061 "EHLO mail.goop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752729AbYJXSZa (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Oct 2008 14:25:30 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20081023192618.GS3184@webber.adilger.int> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Andreas Dilger wrote: > >> Hmm..... is it considered safe to depend on the userspace limits.h >> header file? I guess if we trust that header file to be correct we >> could check the value of CHAR_MIN and/or CHAR_MAX as defined by >> limits.h. >> > > That would likely fail on cross-compiled environments, right? > /usr/include/limits.h uses #include_next to pick up gcc's private limits.h, so it should be safe to use in a kernel cross-build environment. (Picking up the compiler's limits.h directly would be better.) J