[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <50A505D4.1080606@zytor.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 07:10:12 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
CC: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
Vineet.Gupta1@...opsys.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
James Hogan <james.hogan@...tec.com>
Subject: Re: new architectures, time_t __kernel_long_t
On 11/15/2012 06:36 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>
>> Glibc has been providing its own types for years.
>> Kernel provided types used to be wrong for ia32
>> on x86-64.
>
> What about ioctls and other calls then that actually do rely on the
> kernel headers and use the __kernel_*_t types?
>
Now, glibc *shouldn't* have to do that... it is an indication of failure
on our part.
-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