[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181213050313.GA21201@ip-172-31-15-78>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2018 05:03:13 +0000
From: Kevin Easton <kevin@...rana.org>
To: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>,
"H. J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>,
x32@...ldd.debian.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Can we drop upstream Linux x32 support?
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 11:29:14AM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
...
> I can't say anything about the syscall interface. However, what I do know
> is that the weird combination of a 32-bit userland with a 64-bit kernel
> interface is sometimes causing issues. For example, application code usually
> expects things like time_t to be 32-bit on a 32-bit system. However, this
> isn't the case for x32 which is why code fails to build.
OpenBSD and NetBSD both have 64-bit time_t on 32-bit systems and have
had for four or five years at this point.
- Kevin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists