From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753591Ab3LZR7J (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Dec 2013 12:59:09 -0500 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:45119 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753463Ab3LZR7I (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Dec 2013 12:59:08 -0500 Message-ID: <52BC6E3B.9040703@zytor.com> Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2013 09:58:19 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "H.J. Lu" , Christoph Hellwig CC: LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use __kernel_long_t/__kernel_ulong_t in References: <20131225145447.GA18146@gmail.com> <20131226100348.GA7751@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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