From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] Update kernel uabi header files for x32 Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 09:52:59 -0800 Message-ID: <52DD627B.6090509@zytor.com> References: <1388182464-28428-1-git-send-email-hjl.tools@gmail.com> <20131228163308.GA1638@infradead.org> <52DD6101.4010708@zytor.com> <20140120175033.GA11534@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:49002 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753874AbaATRxj (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jan 2014 12:53:39 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: "H.J. Lu" , Christoph Hellwig Cc: linux-arch , LKML , Linus Torvalds , Ralf Baechle , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon On 01/20/2014 09:51 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 9:50 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 09:46:41AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >>> This comment by Christoph was literally the only feedback on this >>> patchset. The definition of __kernel_[u]long_t is "the size of 'long' >>> for the native kernel for the ABI". H.J.'s patchset only affects x86 >>> (specifically x86-64) since on all other platforms __kernel_[u]long_t is >>> simply defined as long/unsigned long. >> >> Btw, sorry for the delay in getting back yo your question. How about >> __abi_long_t or __kabi_long_t instead? >> > > FWIW, in glibc, we use __syscall_ulong_t/__syscall_ulong_t instead of > __kernel_[u]long_t. > Yes, but glibc defines its own headers and doesn't rely on the types exported from the kernel. We could rename them all, but that would *definitely* seem like breaking the universe for no good reason. -hpa