Re: [RFC v6 07/23] RISC-V: Use 64-bit time_t and off_t for RV32 and RV64

2020-02-20 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 1:46 AM Joseph Myers wrote: > > On Thu, 20 Feb 2020, Vineet Gupta wrote: > > > The first 4 will need more work as sym aliasing like > > strong_alias (__xstat64, __xstat) > > > > will be needed in those ARM files (which in turn use i386). > > The situation for Arm is f

Re: switching ARC to 64-bit time_t (Re: [RFC v6 07/23] RISC-V: Use 64-bit time_t and off_t for RV32 and RV64)

2020-02-20 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 12:11 AM Lukasz Majewski wrote: > > On 2/14/20 2:39 PM, Alistair Francis wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 5:30 PM Joseph Myers > > An the reason this all works on RISCV is that your kernel doesn't > > define __ARCH_WANT_STAT64 -> lacks __NR_statat64 and instead uses the

Re: switching ARC to 64-bit time_t (Re: [RFC v6 07/23] RISC-V: Use 64-bit time_t and off_t for RV32 and RV64)

2020-02-20 Thread Lukasz Majewski
Hi Arnd, > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 12:11 AM Lukasz Majewski > wrote: > > > On 2/14/20 2:39 PM, Alistair Francis wrote: > > > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 5:30 PM Joseph Myers > > > An the reason this all works on RISCV is that your kernel doesn't > > > define __ARCH_WANT_STAT64 -> lacks __NR_sta

Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 9/9] ath5k: Constify ioreadX() iomem argument (as in generic implementation)

2020-02-20 Thread Jiri Slaby
On 19. 02. 20, 18:50, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > The ioreadX() helpers have inconsistent interface. On some architectures > void *__iomem address argument is a pointer to const, on some not. > > Implementations of ioreadX() do not modify the memory under the address > so they can be converted t

Re: [RFC v6 07/23] RISC-V: Use 64-bit time_t and off_t for RV32 and RV64

2020-02-20 Thread Lukasz Majewski
Hi Arnd, Joseph, > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 1:46 AM Joseph Myers > wrote: > > > > On Thu, 20 Feb 2020, Vineet Gupta wrote: > > > > > The first 4 will need more work as sym aliasing like > > > strong_alias (__xstat64, __xstat) > > > > > > will be needed in those ARM files (which in turn use

Re: switching ARC to 64-bit time_t (Re: [RFC v6 07/23] RISC-V: Use 64-bit time_t and off_t for RV32 and RV64)

2020-02-20 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 10:37 AM Lukasz Majewski wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 12:11 AM Lukasz Majewski > > > > Would it be possible to take a snapshot of your glibc tree > > The description of the status of Y2038 supporting glibc on ARM 32 can > be found here [1]. > > The most recent patche

Re: switching ARC to 64-bit time_t (Re: [RFC v6 07/23] RISC-V: Use 64-bit time_t and off_t for RV32 and RV64)

2020-02-20 Thread Lukasz Majewski
Hi Arnd, > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 10:37 AM Lukasz Majewski > wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 12:11 AM Lukasz Majewski > > > > > > Would it be possible to take a snapshot of your glibc tree > > > > The description of the status of Y2038 supporting glibc on ARM 32 > > can be found here [1]

Re: [PATCH 08/15] nios2: Use Linux kABI for syscall return

2020-02-20 Thread Adhemerval Zanella
On 19/02/2020 18:40, Vineet Gupta wrote: > On 2/10/20 11:20 AM, Adhemerval Zanella wrote: >> It changes the nios INTERNAL_SYSCALL_RAW macro to return a negative >> value instead of 'r2' register value on 'err' macro argument. >> >> The macro INTERNAL_SYSCALL_DECL is no longer required, and the >

Re: [RFC v6 07/23] RISC-V: Use 64-bit time_t and off_t for RV32 and RV64

2020-02-20 Thread Joseph Myers
On Thu, 20 Feb 2020, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > But surely that structure layout would be the same on ARM and ARC > as well as all other 32-bit architectures with _TIME_BITS=64, right? Yes. > What's wrong with having a single implementation for the most > recent set of stat syscalls, with the older

Re: switching ARC to 64-bit time_t (Re: [RFC v6 07/23] RISC-V: Use 64-bit time_t and off_t for RV32 and RV64)

2020-02-20 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 2:15 PM Lukasz Majewski wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 10:37 AM Lukasz Majewski > > wrote: > > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 12:11 AM Lukasz Majewski > > > > Are there any glibc issues that prevent it from working > > > > correctly, > > > > > > I think that the glibc wr

Re: switching ARC to 64-bit time_t (Re: [RFC v6 07/23] RISC-V: Use 64-bit time_t and off_t for RV32 and RV64)

2020-02-20 Thread Lukasz Majewski
Hi Arnd, > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 2:15 PM Lukasz Majewski wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 10:37 AM Lukasz Majewski > > > wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 12:11 AM Lukasz Majewski > > > > > Are there any glibc issues that prevent it > > > > > from working correctly, > > > > > >

Re: switching ARC to 64-bit time_t (Re: [RFC v6 07/23] RISC-V: Use 64-bit time_t and off_t for RV32 and RV64)

2020-02-20 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 4:42 PM Lukasz Majewski wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 2:15 PM Lukasz Majewski wrote: > > I do see two approaches here: > > 1. In glibc: > > When -D_TIME_BITS=64 is set - redirections are enabled for syscall > wrappers; for example __clock_settime64 is used instead of

Re: switching ARC to 64-bit time_t (Re: [RFC v6 07/23] RISC-V: Use 64-bit time_t and off_t for RV32 and RV64)

2020-02-20 Thread Helmut Grohne
Hi Arnd, On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 09:31:32AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > How do I build a latest RISCV 32-bit kernel + userland - do you have > > > a buildroot branch somewhere that I can build / test with qemu ? > > > > Maybe a bit off topic - there is such QEMU and Yocto/OE based test > > s

Re: switching ARC to 64-bit time_t (Re: [RFC v6 07/23] RISC-V: Use 64-bit time_t and off_t for RV32 and RV64)

2020-02-20 Thread Lukasz Majewski
Hi Arnd, > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 4:42 PM Lukasz Majewski wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 2:15 PM Lukasz Majewski > > > wrote: > > > > > I do see two approaches here: > > > > 1. In glibc: > > > > When -D_TIME_BITS=64 is set - redirections are enabled for syscall > > wrappers; for exampl

Re: [PATCH 08/15] nios2: Use Linux kABI for syscall return

2020-02-20 Thread Vineet Gupta
Hi Adhemerval, On 2/20/20 5:14 AM, Adhemerval Zanella wrote: > > > On 19/02/2020 18:40, Vineet Gupta wrote: >> On 2/10/20 11:20 AM, Adhemerval Zanella wrote: >>> It changes the nios INTERNAL_SYSCALL_RAW macro to return a negative >>> value instead of 'r2' register value on 'err' macro argument.

Re: [PATCH 08/15] nios2: Use Linux kABI for syscall return

2020-02-20 Thread Vineet Gupta
On 2/20/20 12:39 PM, Vineet Gupta wrote: > Am I not following this correctly ? Oh never mind, they use 2 seperate regs to convey syscall result and error, so your code is right. ___ linux-snps-arc mailing list linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org http://li