[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YrHSaLombzbJwLhF@yuki>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2022 16:15:04 +0200
From: Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@...e.cz>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-api@...r.kernel.org" <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
"libc-alpha@...rceware.org" <libc-alpha@...rceware.org>,
"arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
"ltp@...ts.linux.it" <ltp@...ts.linux.it>,
"zack@...folio.org" <zack@...folio.org>,
"dhowells@...hat.com" <dhowells@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] uapi: Make __{u,s}64 match {u,}int64_t in userspace
Hi!
> > This changes the __u64 and __s64 in userspace on 64bit platforms from
> > long long (unsigned) int to just long (unsigned) int in order to match
> > the uint64_t and int64_t size in userspace for C code.
> >
> > We cannot make the change for C++ since that would be non-backwards
> > compatible change and may cause possible regressions and even
> > compilation failures, e.g. overloaded function may no longer find a
> > correct match.
>
> Isn't is enough just to mention C++ name mangling?
I just picked up the argument that was brought up in the discussion
about the v1 patch and used it as a concrete example. Mangling is I
guess more straightforward example of a breakage. I can change the
description if there is consensus that such description would be better.
--
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@...e.cz
Powered by blists - more mailing lists