![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Hi Dave, On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 23:58:10 -0800 (PST) "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> wrote: > > From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> > Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 18:42:28 +1100 > > How's this one :-) > > I don't think this is the way to go. > > I think we really need to give the 32-bit compatability > types names and allow 64-bit arches to define what their > 32-bit counterparts use. OK, we can discuss that as well, but what do you think of the particular patch that I supplied? It is independent of the naming of types. If I can get linux/compat32.h and CONFIG_COMPAT32 started, the consolidation will preceed fairly rapidly and I think that is far more important than what the names look like ... > For example, nlink_t is going to need to be different > for sparc 32-bit compat vs. most other platforms because > we use a signed short there. This will be allowed for when linux/compat32.h includes asm/compat32.h at a later stage. asm/compat32.h will be expected to have typedefs for compat32_<type> (or __kernel_<type>32 whatever) for all the types that vary between the architectures. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:31 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||