linux-kernel - Re: x32 and width of blksize_t, suseconds

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 16 Mar 2012 07:31:00 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Paul Eggert <eggert@...ucla.edu>
CC:	"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	GNU C Library <libc-alpha@...rceware.org>
Subject: Re: x32 and width of blksize_t, suseconds_t

On 03/16/2012 01:19 AM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> Come to think of it, the proposed x32 patch may have issues
> with blksize_t and suseconds_t as well.  POSIX says that an x32
> implementation must support at least one programming environment
> (presumably settable via a feature test macro) where blksize_t
> and suseconds_t are no wider than 'long'; see
> <http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/basedefs/sys_types.h.html>.
> But if I understand things correctly, x32 glibc would
> define these to be 'long long'.  This issue affects system
> calls such as 'stat' and 'select'.

That's just not going to happen, sorry.  Why on Earth is this a
requirement?  It makes no sense whatsoever.

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

--
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/