From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:59665)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1SDhJV-0003sB-5X
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 30 Mar 2012 15:16:46 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1SDhJT-0005dn-JE
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 30 Mar 2012 15:16:44 -0400
Received: from mail-yw0-f45.google.com ([209.85.213.45]:56351)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1SDhJT-0005db-Em
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 30 Mar 2012 15:16:43 -0400
Received: by yhoo21 with SMTP id o21so737842yho.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Fri, 30 Mar 2012 12:16:42 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4F760697.7060304@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 14:16:39 -0500
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1333130099-25238-1-git-send-email-aliguori@us.ibm.com>
	<4F75F468.7010804@codemonkey.ws> <4F75F564.7040602@mail.berlios.de>
	<4F75FB78.4090501@codemonkey.ws> <4F76018A.308@redhat.com>
	<4F76042A.8040007@codemonkey.ws> <4F7605E9.4060608@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4F7605E9.4060608@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qtest: fix 32-bit build
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Stefan Weil <weil@mail.berlios.de>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On 03/30/2012 02:13 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 30/03/2012 21:06, Anthony Liguori ha scritto:
>> On 03/30/2012 01:55 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> Il 30/03/2012 20:29, Anthony Liguori ha scritto:
>>>>> Now it will fail with w64 (which uses 64 bit time_t and
>>>>> a 32 bit long).
>>>>
>>>> That's a bug in w64 (it has a broken ABI).
>>>>
>>>> Do we actually build and run on w64??
>>>
>>> It's actually sensible and x32 does the same.  Not too urgent though.
>>
>> I don't understand how making a long 32 bit is sensible but...  I sent a
>> patch that should at least address q64.
>>
>> Am not sure what x32 is though.
>
> x32 is 32-bit ABI (with 32-bit pointers and 4GB address space) with the
> x86-64 (64-bit) ISA.

Wow.  That's..  interesting :-)

In general, violating sizeof(long) >= sizeof(void *) seems like an exceeding bad 
idea to me.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

>
> Paolo