[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200907301920.52257.arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 19:20:52 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: eranian@...il.com
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Maynard Johnson <mpjohn@...ibm.com>,
Carl Love <cel@...ibm.com>,
Corey J Ashford <cjashfor@...ibm.com>,
Philip Mucci <mucci@...s.utk.edu>,
Dan Terpstra <terpstra@...s.utk.edu>,
"perfmon2-devel" <perfmon2-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: I.1 - System calls - ioctl
On Thursday 30 July 2009, stephane eranian wrote:
> But that won't always work in the case of a 32-bit monitoring tool
> running on top of
> a 64-bit OS. Imagine the target id is indeed 64-bit, e.g., inode
> number (as suggested
> by Peter). It's not because you are a 32-bit tool than you cannot name
> a monitoring
> resource in a 64-bit OS.
Right, there are obviously things that you cannot address with
a 'long', but there are potentially other things that you could
that you cannot address with an 'int', e.g. an opaque user
token (representing a user pointer) that you can get back in
the sample data.
In the worst case, you could still redefine the argument as a
transparent union to a long and pointer in the future if you
use a 'long' now. AFAICT, there are no advantages of using
an 'int' instead of a 'long', but there are disadvantages of
using a 'long long'.
Arnd <><
--
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