On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 10:45:43AM +0000, Pinski, Andrew wrote: > Also about time_t, my original patch had used 32bit but was asked to > change it to the 64bit one. So now I am upset this being asked again > to change it back.
At the time, we were not aware of plans to fix existing 32-bit architectures, so we followed Linus' similar request on x32. > The review process for the linux kernel is much harder than the review > process of gcc or even glibc now. This is not really about kernel code review but about defining the user/kernel ABI. It shouldn't even be a kernel-only decision, we need to get the libc people involved. So yes, you get to prototype such ABI in several kernel patch incarnations and code may be thrown away but that's better than making the wrong decision on the long run. As for gcc, the ILP32 ABI is clear to them, they only have to review implementation details. -- Catalin -- 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/
