From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>, Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>,
Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>,
Arthur Jones <arthur.jones@qlogic.com>,
Vasily Tarasov <vtaras@openvz.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jan Kara <jack@ucw.cz>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: build fix for x86_64...
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 15:34:01 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46A13859.7020608@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <617E1C2C70743745A92448908E030B2A01FA4C43@scsmsx411.amr.corp.intel.com>
Luck, Tony wrote:
> At the moment our problem is that there is some code that has
> been added to handle the compatability problem caused by u64
> objects having different alignment when running on 32-bit and
> 64-bit systems. This only affects ia64 and x86-64 because all
> the other 32/64 bit capable systems wisely avoided this issue
> by making 64-bit objects *always* 8-byte aligned.
> It is possible that in the future more such issues will arise
> (either because we find some more existing interfaces that
> have this problem, or because new interfaces are introduced
> that also have this problem). Such new code will also require
> some compatability functions. These functions will also only
> be needed on ia64 and x86-64, and even on these systems the
> code will only be needed if CONFIG_COMPAT=y
The issue here is I was looking at it from a new interfaces perspective,
and not from a legacy interfaces perspective. However, for new
interfaces we want the opposite -- properly aligned elements -- so
please disregard previous objection.
However, I'm still thinking it might be worthwhile to consider the
__i[us]64 typedefs previously discussed as a way to avoid alignment
bloopers in new interfaces.
-hpa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-07-20 22:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-07-19 22:24 build fix for x86_64 Arthur Jones
2007-07-19 23:09 ` Andi Kleen
2007-07-19 23:54 ` Luck, Tony
2007-07-20 8:32 ` Andi Kleen
2007-07-20 15:55 ` Randy Dunlap
2007-07-20 16:20 ` Luck, Tony
2007-07-20 16:48 ` Matthew Wilcox
2007-07-20 17:03 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-07-20 17:25 ` Andi Kleen
2007-07-20 17:38 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-07-20 17:40 ` Andreas Schwab
2007-07-20 17:45 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-07-20 18:13 ` Andi Kleen
2007-07-20 19:29 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-07-20 22:08 ` Luck, Tony
2007-07-20 22:34 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2007-07-20 18:27 ` Andreas Schwab
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=46A13859.7020608@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=arthur.jones@qlogic.com \
--cc=jack@ucw.cz \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=randy.dunlap@oracle.com \
--cc=schwab@suse.de \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=vtaras@openvz.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