Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755596AbaDVK6N (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Apr 2014 06:58:13 -0400 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.13]:53916 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754432AbaDVK6I (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Apr 2014 06:58:08 -0400 From: Arnd Bergmann To: Ley Foon Tan Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , Linux-Arch , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" , cltang@codesourcery.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/28] nios2 Linux kernel port Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 12:56:08 +0200 Message-ID: <16597012.pEkDc99HDN@wuerfel> User-Agent: KMail/4.11.5 (Linux/3.11.0-18-generic; KDE/4.11.5; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <1397824031-4892-1-git-send-email-lftan@altera.com> <5354AD36.5090809@zytor.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:IElTUq6j+ZIKgV1x8gp8Bx9CcnTft2chN1IZ/JZph1o LAQAK9jBwGMJ9hPfcC2UACcdvuRTLznu0H0e6Jxu35QGHqf5o4 /qSSccZa7/WCxyo3Fc6dTHP0OgWWcvqsye3RZ4KEj2iLDrYG9k iGCy/9el1SwNeh3HUfjycG2T/wuOHTdqwYsZvDV5jucK1hNUjv TAZMZWr8dR99sxDIGogC6YfH4yTKfSDV1l4s/6sJcdBslbgEeh 78/Vv+RwdFGPk/XMk6sT26iPN5rPt0YC7CMgUTqE4B44mJ9ClK gVR7mc/cEIJllz+h+G6715VX8ChN30z3833GWCFD4owZVSV7w7 POb7jSnwLPILOZ944fyM= Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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. > Excerpt from https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/11/14/358 : > "Obviously, we want to use 64-bit off_t, but this is achieved already > through loff_t, which is used in all places in the asm-generic > ABI anyway (the syscalls using off_t are stripped out). I don't > think we want to have the other ones set to 64 bit on ARC or Meta, > although I'm not 100% sure about ino_t and nlink_t. " This is all still true. You should have no syscall using 'off_t', only loff_t. I still don't know whether we would want 32 or 64 bit ino_t and nlink_t for new architectures. It seems it would gain very little, but have a noticeable overhead. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/