[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F432B27.4000708@zytor.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 21:27:03 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
thomas@...3r.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Linux 3.3-rc4
On 02/20/2012 09:21 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 9:06 PM, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> So it really is limited to only x86.
>
> Oh, and if people really are using "uname()" to figure out that they
> are running a 64-bit kernel, then we should probably make uname() use
> "is_compat_task()" instead of checking the PER_LINUX32 personality.
>
> So we already do have support for returning a different machine-name
> to 32-bit binaries, but it uses the "personality" thing that nobody
> cares about, rather than the compat layer. Looks like purely
> historical reasons.
>
No, it serves a real function. I use both directions of this to deal
with various compatibility things. PER_LINUX32 lets you run, say, an
installer as if it was on a 32-bit program, even if it is written in a
scripting language (and hence running a native 64-bit interpreter).
Similarly, a 32-bit legacy binary can still function as part of a bigger
64-bit system.
So let's not change that just because someone did something idiotic.
-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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists