lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Dec]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Use __kernel_long_t/__kernel_ulong_t in <linux/resource.h>
From
On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 9:58 AM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
> 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.

FWIW, I prefer my first alternative. I only added the second one
since I can't test for other ABIs.

I am enclosing my kernel header file checker. It compares
kernel header files against glibc header files for -m64, -m32
and -mx32.

--
H.J.
[unhandled content-type:application/x-xz]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-12-26 19:41    [W:0.039 / U:0.196 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site