On 2014/4/24 上午 02:15, Pinski, Andrew wrote: > >> > On Apr 23, 2014, at 10:59 AM, "Chung-Lin Tang" <clt...@codesourcery.com> >> > wrote: >> > >>> >> On 2014/4/22 07:20 PM, Ley Foon Tan wrote: >>> >> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 6:56 PM, Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de> wrote: >>>>> >>>> On Tuesday 22 April 2014 18:37:11 Ley Foon Tan wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Arnd and Peter Anvin, >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> Other than 64-bit time_t, clock_t and suseconds_t, can you >>>>>>> >>>>>> confirm >>>>>>> >>>>>> that we don't need to have 64 bit off_t? See detail in link >>>>>>> >>>>>> below. >>>>>>> >>>>>> I can submit the patches for 64-bit time changes >>>>>>> >>>>>> (include/asm-generic/posix_types.h and other archs) if everyone >>>>>>> >>>>>> is >>>>>>> >>>>>> agreed on this. >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> Yes. >>> >> Okay, will doing that. >> > >> > I believe that arm64 ILP32 will also be affected. What is the status of >> > this configuration? Has the glibc/kernel ABI been finalized? > Not yet. I am still working out the signal handling part. But we already > agreed on 64bit time_t, clock_t, and suseconds_t. And we agreed to a 64bit > offset_t too. > > On a related note suseconds in the timespec in posix is defined to be long. > So it would nice if the kernel ignores the upper 32bits so we (glibc > developers) can fix this for new targets including x32 and arm64/ilp32.
Hmm, but that means for purely 32-bit architectures like nios2, which unlike x86_64 or arm64, never has a 64-bit mode, suseconds_t as a 64-bit type in the kernel is simply wasted. Chung-Lin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
