From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 15:52:15 +0000 (GMT) Received: from return.false.org ([66.207.162.98]:37012 "EHLO return.false.org") by ftp.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S20022316AbXCMPwK (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 15:52:10 +0000 Received: from return.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by return.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DF154B26F; Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:51:31 -0500 (CDT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (dsl093-172-095.pit1.dsl.speakeasy.net [66.93.172.95]) by return.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 476E54B262; Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:51:27 -0500 (CDT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HR7qx-0000qC-FW; Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:19:51 -0400 Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:19:51 -0400 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Ralf Baechle Cc: Peter Watkins , linux-mips@linux-mips.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Have sigpoll and sigio band field match glibc for n64 Message-ID: <20070313141951.GA3206@caradoc.them.org> References: <1173469586997-git-send-email-pwatkins@sicortex.com> <20070310132423.GA1295@linux-mips.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070310132423.GA1295@linux-mips.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 14454 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: dan@debian.org Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips On Sat, Mar 10, 2007 at 01:24:24PM +0000, Ralf Baechle wrote: > On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 02:46:25PM -0500, Peter Watkins wrote: > > > The siginfo field si_fd is incorrect on n64 because the band field does > > not match glibc. > > Susv3 says: > > [...] > The header shall define the siginfo_t type as a structure that > includes at least the following members: > > [...] > long si_band Band event for SIGPOLL. > [...] > > So the kernel is right, glibc is wrong I'd say ... This will break the ABI only for uses of si_band and si_fd, and only on n64. Anyone see a reason why I shouldn't change glibc? Ralf, as I mentioned on IRC, I've got bigger worries about siginfo. Shouldn't n32 be using the same siginfo as o32? It's got pointers in it. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery