Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 30 Aug 2004 02:43:27 -0600 | From | Erik Andersen <> | Subject | Re: [ANNOUNCE] linux-libc-headers 2.6.8.1 |
| |
On Mon Aug 30, 2004 at 01:07:57AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote: > On Mon Aug 30, 2004 at 12:24:22AM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > >> It has never been a constant, and any portable piece of > >> software needs to evaluate it not at compile time. > >> When I first did the sparc64 port, the biggest source of > >> portability problems was of the "uses PAGE_SIZE in some way" > >> nature. > >> This is a positive change, we should break the build of these > >> apps and thus get them fixed. > > On Mon, Aug 30, 2004 at 01:48:35AM -0600, Erik Andersen wrote: > > There is no question that using PAGE_SIZE should be considered > > harmful. But this particular change to the linux-libc-headers > > makes it easy for the common case (bog standard x86) folk to keep > > using a fixed PAGE_SIZE value, and keep writing crap code which > > is now _guaranteed_ to blow chunks on mips, x86_64, etc. > > I think outright removal of PAGE_SIZE from user space may be a > > much better choice, with some sortof #error perhaps... Wouldn't > > it be better for the whole world if people would get errors like > > foo.c:10:2: #error "Don't use PAGE_SIZE, use sysconf(_SC_PAGESIZE)" > > making people actually fix their code? > > In general people #define PAGE_SIZE (getpagesize()) or some such.
Then perhaps the right thing is for linux-libc-headers to always provide such a define for PAGE_SIZE for _all_ architectures, not just for those that happen to have variable PAGE_SIZE values.
-Erik
-- Erik B. Andersen http://codepoet-consulting.com/ --This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons-- - 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/
| |