[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FB58901.5060604@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 16:25:53 -0700
From: David Daney <ddaney.cavm@...il.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, mingo@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/10] Use __kernel_[u]long_t for x32 user space compatibility
On 05/17/2012 04:11 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 05/17/2012 04:07 PM, David Daney wrote:
>>
>> Has anybody checked how this affects MIPS n32 userspace?
>>
>> I think it totally breaks it.
>>
>
> Do you have any basis whatsoever for that statement?
You should have asked for a 'solid basis'.
My basis is that the name '__kernel_ulong_t' implies, in my mind, that
it would have the width of a kernel unsigned long.
Really it should be called something like __abi_alternate_ulong_t.
> This should have
> zero effect on any non-x32 platforms.
After further reflection on this, you are probably right.
Sorry for raising the alarm (or would that be crying Wolf?).
>
>> In addition, 109a1f32 (sysinfo: Use explicit types in<linux/sysinfo.h>)
>> is probably bad. I think it may need to be reverted, or somebody should
>> fix all the __kernel_{,u}long_t definitions for the ABI that may have
>> been broken by the change.
>
> You realize __kernel_[u]long_t didn't even exist until the 3.4 kernel,
> right?
Yes.
David Daney
--
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