Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756087AbbBLPug (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Feb 2015 10:50:36 -0500 Received: from foss-mx-na.foss.arm.com ([217.140.108.86]:43434 "EHLO foss-mx-na.foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753150AbbBLPue (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Feb 2015 10:50:34 -0500 Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 15:50:24 +0000 From: Catalin Marinas To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: "H.J. Lu" , Rich Felker , GNU C Library , Andrew Pinski , musl@lists.openwall.com, LKML , Andrew Pinski , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 00/24] ILP32 support in ARM64 Message-ID: <20150212155023.GA25491@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <20141002155217.GH32147@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20150210181302.GA23886@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20150211190252.GB23507@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20150211192558.GE23507@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20150211194741.GI23507@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <54DBB87C.5060901@amacapital.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <54DBB87C.5060901@amacapital.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2161 Lines: 49 On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 12:15:56PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On 02/11/2015 11:57 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > >>>>trivially satisfied if you consider x32 and x86_64 separate > >>>>compilation environments, but it's not related to the core issue: that > >>>>the definition of timespec violates core (not obscure) requirements of > >>>>both POSIX and C11. At the time you were probably unaware of the C11 > >>>>requirement. Note that it's a LOT harder to effect change in the C > >>>>standard, so even if the Austin Group would be amenable to changing > >>>>the requirement for timespec to allow something like nseconds_t, > >>>>getting WG14 to make this change to work around a Linux/glibc mistake > >>>>does not sound practical. > >>> > >>>That is very unfortunate. I consider it is too late for x32 to change. > >> > >>Why? It's hardly an incompatible ABI change, as long as the > >>kernel/libc fills the upper bits (for old programs that read them > >>based on the old headers) when structs are read from the kernel to the > >>application, and ignores the upper bits (potentially set or left > >>uninitialized by the application) when strings are passed from > >>userspace to the kernel. Newly built apps using the struct definition > >>with 32-bit tv_nsec would need new libc to ensure that the high bits > >>aren't interpreted, but this could be handled by symbol versioning. > >> > > > >We have considered this option. But since kernel wouldn't change > >tv_nsec/tv_usec handling just for x32, it wasn't selected. > > Did anyone *ask* the kernel people (e.g. hpa)? It seems so: https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/8/31/244 Couple of more replies from hpa: https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/8/31/261 https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/2/8/408 It looks like hpa was going to talk the POSIX committee but I don't know what the conclusion was and didn't follow the thread (at the time I wasn't interested in ARM ILP32). -- Catalin -- 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/