Re: new architectures, time_t __kernel_long_t

[H.J. Lu]

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 6:36 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thursday 15 November 2012, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 1:14 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Wednesday 14 November 2012, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> >> On 11/14/2012 04:18 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> >> > Since we are in the review phase for two new architectures that we
>> >> > should be merging into the mainline kernel, I think we need to
>> >> > come up with a solution for making them use a proper 64-bit time_t.
>> >> >
>> >> > Right now, the only 32-bit user space interface we have to use 64-bit
>> >> > time_t is the x32 side of x86-64, and that works by overriding all
>> >> > "long" sized types to be 64 bit at the ABI level, which we don't
>> >> > want for pure 32 bit architectures.
>> >>
>> >> Sort of.  Either way, the kernel headers aren't really x32-clean yet, so
>> >> we have an opportunity to do things more cleanly as we are implementing
>> >> this.
>> >
>> > Ah, I didn't know that. How does one build an x32 libc then?
>>
>> Glibc has been providing its own types for years.
>> Kernel provided types used to be wrong for ia32
>> on x86-64.
>
> What about ioctls and other calls then that actually do rely on the
> kernel headers and use the __kernel_*_t types?
>

Glibc defines __syscall_slong_t and __syscall_ulong_t.

-- 
H.J.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/