[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 14:42:08 +0100
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...glemail.com>,
Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>,
Arjan van de Veen <arjan@...radead.org>,
Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [patch] Performance Counters for Linux, v3
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> writes:
> On that, I still don't think its a good idea to use bitfields in an ABI.
> The C std is just not strict enough on them,
If you constrain yourself to a single architecture in practice C
bitfield standards are quite good e.g. on Linux/x86 it is "everyone
implements what gcc does" (and on linux/ppc "what ppc gcc does").
And the syscall ABI is certainly restricted to one architecture.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists