On Monday 19 May 2014 18:12:18 Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Mon, 19 May 2014, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
> > A related question would be how you plan to support future CPU architectures
> > that never had the 32-bit time_t in the kernel ABI. Would you also want
> > to provide both 32 and 64 bit time_t to user space on those?
>
> I'd expect those just to have 64-bit time_t in userspace (like x32) -
> choosing a different type for time_t from the start is a lot simpler than
> setting up a second set of interfaces with associated symbol versioning
> for an existing architecture. This whole discussion started with the
> question of whether Nios II should be such an architecture....
Ok
> (Other variants may arise as well, e.g. architectures with existing kernel
> support that only get glibc support later.)
Good point.
Arnd
--
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/
