Re: 32bit emulation of wireless ioctls

[Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>]

On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 03:17:40PM -0800, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
> > Anyways: for me it is just slightly annoying to not have 32bit 
> > emulation for something, but for other ports like sparc64/ppc64/mips64 
> > it can be show stopper because they only have 32bit userland.
> 
> 	<Puzzled of why you would *not* want a 64 bit userland>

Of course I want to have a 64bit userland. In fact I have one.

Just we offer the users the choice to boot 32bit distributions with
64bit kernels too, in case they only need a single application
that needs 64bit or similar. I'm also prepared to rip out or ignore
very obscure parts of the 32bit emulation (in fact I did that already),
but if it's used commonly or even called in bootup it should be supported.

Short term I will just settle on getting that message away so that
RedHat users won't bother me anymore. Can you suggest a good way to 
handle SIOCGIWNAME? Should I just make it return -EINVAL?

> > Expect trouble when DaveM wants to plug a wireless card into one of 
> > his sparc64 boxes ;-)
> 
> 	I want to see that ;-)
> 	I've always been telling David and Stephane here that they
> should loan me an Itanium box to make sure IrDA and Wireless LAN work
> properly, for the day we will release a PDA with an Itanium processor.

I understand why you don't see much point to run 32bit on Itanium
because of the performance.  But that's not a problem on all 64bit ports...

-Andi