[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <14427.1315058668@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2011 10:04:28 -0400
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Richard Kuo <rkuo@...eaurora.org>,
Mark Salter <msalter@...hat.com>,
Jonas Bonn <jonas@...thpole.se>,
Tobias Klauser <tklauser@...tanz.ch>
Subject: Re: RFD: x32 ABI system call numbers
On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 10:41:16 +0200, Arnd Bergmann said:
(Admittedly, I'm tuning in late on this discussion, but...)
> For the ioctl interface however, the __u64/__s64 type in the x32 ABI
> must be defined with __attribute__((packed,aligned(4))) to match what
> the kernel implements because it emulates the x86-32 ABI.
Is this a cast-in-stone issue, or is it still not too late to change that?
And if we change that, can we simplify anything?
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists