Dan Dennedy wrote:
> On Sunday 20 May 2007 08:28, Stefan Richter wrote:
>> maybe we should change
...
>> struct raw1394_cycle_timer {
[to consist of two u64 to get same alignment on all architectures]
...
>> before a libraw1394 with get-cycle-timer support is released.
>> Shall I prepare according
On Sunday 20 May 2007 08:28, Stefan Richter wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Sunday 20 May 2007, Stefan Richter wrote:
> >>> Note that this data structure only needs conversion on x86_64 and ia64,
but
> >>> not on powerpc and other 64 bit architectures that align __u64 also in
> >>> 32 bit mod
I wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann wrote:
Note that this data structure only needs conversion on x86_64 and ia64, but
not on powerpc and other 64 bit architectures that align __u64 also in
32 bit mode.
...
> maybe we should change
>
> /* argument to RAW1394_IOC_GET_CYCLE_TIMER ioctl */
> stru
Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Sunday 20 May 2007, Stefan Richter wrote:
>> maybe we should change
...
>> struct raw1394_cycle_timer {
...
>> before a libraw1394 with get-cycle-timer support is released.
>
> Yes, if you still have the chance to change this without breaking
> users, that would be ideal.
On Sunday 20 May 2007, Stefan Richter wrote:
> maybe we should change
>
> /* argument to RAW1394_IOC_GET_CYCLE_TIMER ioctl */
> struct raw1394_cycle_timer {
> /* contents of Isochronous Cycle Timer register,
> as in OHCI 1.1 clause 5.13 (also with non-OHCI hosts) */
> __
Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Sunday 20 May 2007, Stefan Richter wrote:
>>> Note that this data structure only needs conversion on x86_64 and ia64, but
>>> not on powerpc and other 64 bit architectures that align __u64 also in
>>> 32 bit mode.
>> Is this conversion just unnecessary or actually harmful
On Sunday 20 May 2007, Stefan Richter wrote:
>
> > Note that this data structure only needs conversion on x86_64 and ia64, but
> > not on powerpc and other 64 bit architectures that align __u64 also in
> > 32 bit mode.
>
> Is this conversion just unnecessary or actually harmful on ppc64 and other
Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Monday 07 May 2007, Petr Vandrovec wrote:
>> +struct raw1394_cycle_timer32 {
>> +__u32 cycle_timer;
>> +__u64 local_time;
>> +} __attribute__((packed));
>
> Note that this data structure only needs conversion on x86_64 and ia64, but
> not on powerpc and ot
On Monday 07 May 2007, Petr Vandrovec wrote:
> +struct raw1394_cycle_timer32 {
> + __u32 cycle_timer;
> + __u64 local_time;
> +} __attribute__((packed));
Note that this data structure only needs conversion on x86_64 and ia64, but
not on powerpc and other 64 bit architectures that ali
Stefan Richter wrote:
On 7 May, Petr Vandrovec wrote:
This patch makes raw1394 in current Linux git tree (2.6.21-1570) usable to 32bit
applications running on 64bit kernel (tested on i386 app using x86_64 kernel).
[...]
With this in place I was able to run my test app and grab some mpegs, so
On 7 May, Petr Vandrovec wrote:
> This patch makes raw1394 in current Linux git tree (2.6.21-1570) usable to
> 32bit
> applications running on 64bit kernel (tested on i386 app using x86_64 kernel).
[...]
> With this in place I was able to run my test app and grab some mpegs, so I
> believe
> tha
On Sunday 06 May 2007 19:14, Petr Vandrovec wrote:
> Hello Dan,
>
> This patch makes raw1394 in current Linux git tree (2.6.21-1570) usable to
> 32bit
> applications running on 64bit kernel (tested on i386 app using x86_64
> kernel). I
> had to make following changes:
>
> * read() always fail
Petr Vandrovec wrote:
[...]
> * read() always failed with -EFAULT. This was happening due to
> raw1394_compat_read copying data to wrong location - access_ok always
> failed as 'r' is kernel address, not user. Whole function just tried to
> copy data from 'r' to 'r', which is not good.
>
>
Hello Dan,
This patch makes raw1394 in current Linux git tree (2.6.21-1570) usable to 32bit
applications running on 64bit kernel (tested on i386 app using x86_64 kernel).
I
had to make following changes:
* read() always failed with -EFAULT. This was happening due to
raw1394_compat_read copy
14 matches
Mail list logo
