From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: "Thomas Weißschuh" <linux@weissschuh.net>
Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/12] tools/nolibc: always use 64-bit ino_t, off_t and time-related types
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2025 09:44:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251102084429.GD10797@1wt.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251029-nolibc-uapi-types-v1-0-e79de3b215d8@weissschuh.net>
On Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 05:02:50PM +0100, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> nolibc currently uses 32-bit types for various APIs. These are
> problematic as their reduced value range can lead to truncated values.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@weissschuh.net>
Thanks Thomas for this cleanup! Overall this looks good to me. I also
tested my preinit code against it based both on latest and older UAPI
headers (5.4) and everything still builds and seems to work fine.
For the whole series: Acked-by: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Willy
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-02 8:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-29 16:02 [PATCH 00/12] tools/nolibc: always use 64-bit ino_t, off_t and time-related types Thomas Weißschuh
2025-10-29 16:02 ` [PATCH 01/12] tools/nolibc: use 64-bit ino_t Thomas Weißschuh
2025-10-29 16:02 ` [PATCH 02/12] tools/nolibc: handle 64-bit off_t for llseek Thomas Weißschuh
2025-10-30 14:56 ` Arnd Bergmann
2025-10-29 16:02 ` [PATCH 03/12] tools/nolibc: prefer the llseek syscall Thomas Weißschuh
2025-10-29 16:02 ` [PATCH 04/12] tools/nolibc: use 64-bit off_t Thomas Weißschuh
2025-10-29 16:02 ` [PATCH 05/12] tools/nolibc: remove now superfluous overflow check in llseek Thomas Weißschuh
2025-10-30 14:58 ` Arnd Bergmann
2025-10-29 16:02 ` [PATCH 06/12] tools/nolibc: remove more __nolibc_enosys() fallbacks Thomas Weißschuh
2025-10-29 16:02 ` [PATCH 07/12] tools/nolibc: prefer explicit 64-bit time-related system calls Thomas Weißschuh
2025-10-30 14:44 ` Arnd Bergmann
2025-10-29 16:02 ` [PATCH 08/12] tools/nolibc: gettimeofday(): avoid libgcc 64-bit divisions Thomas Weißschuh
2025-10-30 14:57 ` Arnd Bergmann
2025-11-02 8:31 ` Willy Tarreau
2025-11-02 9:27 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-11-02 9:49 ` Willy Tarreau
2025-10-29 16:02 ` [PATCH 09/12] tools/nolibc: use a custom struct timespec Thomas Weißschuh
2025-10-30 14:46 ` Arnd Bergmann
2025-11-02 8:36 ` Willy Tarreau
2025-11-02 8:40 ` Willy Tarreau
2025-11-02 9:41 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-11-02 9:50 ` Willy Tarreau
2025-10-29 16:03 ` [PATCH 10/12] tools/nolibc: always use 64-bit time types Thomas Weißschuh
2025-10-29 16:03 ` [PATCH 11/12] selftests/nolibc: test compatibility of timespec and __kernel_timespec Thomas Weißschuh
2025-10-29 16:03 ` [PATCH 12/12] tools/nolibc: remove time conversions Thomas Weißschuh
2025-10-30 14:58 ` Arnd Bergmann
2025-11-02 8:44 ` Willy Tarreau [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20251102084429.GD10797@1wt.eu \
--to=w@1wt.eu \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@weissschuh.net \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox