From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use __kernel_long_t/__kernel_ulong_t in <linux/resource.h>
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2013 09:58:19 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52BC6E3B.9040703@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMe9rOqx1HDT_rtiz2R0Cz5iAp0AFXhjw6RpTkjgFT_DDDWfVA@mail.gmail.com>
On 12/26/2013 05:52 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
>> c) why you suddenly need these changes now and not when the x32 ABI
>> support was submitted and hopefully heavily tested
>
> Kernel headers had been wrong for -m32/-mx32 on x86-64
> for a long long time. Linux/x86-64 normally use header
> files from glibc, which avoids broken kernel header files.
> Kernel uabi header files fix -m32, but not -mx32, which I am
> working on now.
>
In other words, this work is really part of making *libc make use the
kernel uabi headers, which is a valuable work. The fact that the kernel
headers never got fully ported to x32 is a big reason why x32 is still
labeled experimental.
MIPS N32 and ARM64 ILP32 are x32-like ABIs which of course need to not
be broken. However, currently __kernel_[u]long_t is [unsigned] long for
all ABIs other than x32, so changing [unsigned] long to
__kernel_[u]long_t will be a null change for anything but x32. They
perhaps *SHOULD* be different for N32 or ARM64 ILP32, but that is for
those arch maintainers to set.
However, I believe H.J.'s patches from this morning conditionalizing
this on __BITS_PER_LONG are just plain wrong.
-hpa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-26 17:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-25 14:54 [PATCH] Use __kernel_long_t/__kernel_ulong_t in <linux/resource.h> H.J. Lu
2013-12-26 10:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2013-12-26 13:52 ` H.J. Lu
2013-12-26 13:54 ` H.J. Lu
2013-12-26 17:58 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2013-12-26 18:08 ` H.J. Lu
2013-12-26 19:13 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-12-26 15:36 ` H.J. Lu
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=52BC6E3B.9040703@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.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