Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Sat, 9 Jun 2018 10:43:28 +0300
From:   Yury Norov <ynorov@caviumnetworks.com>
To:     Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>
Cc:     catalin.marinas@arm.com, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-api@vger.kernel.org, szabolcs.nagy@arm.com,
        heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com,
        joseph@codesourcery.com, sellcey@caviumnetworks.com,
        Prasun.Kapoor@caviumnetworks.com, schwab@suse.de, agraf@suse.de,
        bamv2005@gmail.com, geert@linux-m68k.org, Dave.Martin@arm.com,
        kilobyte@angband.pl, manuel.montezelo@gmail.com,
        james.hogan@imgtec.com, cmetcalf@mellanox.com, pinskia@gmail.com,
        linyongting@huawei.com, klimov.linux@gmail.com, broonie@kernel.org,
        maxim.kuvyrkov@linaro.org, fweimer@redhat.com,
        Nathan_Lynch@mentor.com, james.morse@arm.com,
        ramana.gcc@googlemail.com, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com,
        davem@davemloft.net, christoph.muellner@theobroma-systems.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/24] 32-bit userspace ABI: introduce ARCH_32BIT_OFF_T
 config option
Message-ID: <20180609074327.GA32578@yury-thinkpad>
References: <20180608173207.nwoi25jee52gpdwy@armageddon.cambridge.arm.com>
 <mhng-e1922456-a05b-46f9-8644-d45ad70a55e5@palmer-si-x1c4>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <mhng-e1922456-a05b-46f9-8644-d45ad70a55e5@palmer-si-x1c4>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: cavium.com does not designate
 permitted sender hosts)
SpamDiagnosticOutput: 1:99
SpamDiagnosticMetadata: NSPM
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jun 2018 07:43:43.1614 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 06f91172-9d17-40ce-1245-08d5cddcba21
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 711e4ccf-2e9b-4bcf-a551-4094005b6194
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BYAPR07MB4375
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 03:33:51PM -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> On Fri, 08 Jun 2018 10:32:07 PDT (-0700), catalin.marinas@arm.com wrote:
> > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 11:18:49AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote:
> > > diff --git a/arch/Kconfig b/arch/Kconfig
> > > index 76c0b54443b1..ee079244dc3c 100644
> > > --- a/arch/Kconfig
> > > +++ b/arch/Kconfig
> > > @@ -264,6 +264,21 @@ config ARCH_THREAD_STACK_ALLOCATOR
> > >  config ARCH_WANTS_DYNAMIC_TASK_STRUCT
> > >  	bool
> > > 
> > > +config ARCH_32BIT_OFF_T
> > > +	bool
> > > +	depends on !64BIT
> > > +	help
> > > +	  All new 32-bit architectures should have 64-bit off_t type on
> > > +	  userspace side which corresponds to the loff_t kernel type. This
> > > +	  is the requirement for modern ABIs. Some existing architectures
> > > +	  already have 32-bit off_t. This option is enabled for all such
> > > +	  architectures explicitly. Namely: arc, arm, blackfin, cris, frv,
> > > +	  h8300, hexagon, m32r, m68k, metag, microblaze, mips32, mn10300,
> > > +	  nios2, openrisc, parisc32, powerpc32, score, sh, sparc, tile32,
> > > +	  unicore32, x86_32 and xtensa. This is the complete list. Any
> > > +	  new 32-bit architecture should declare 64-bit off_t type on user
> > > +	  side and so should not enable this option.
> > 
> > Do you know if this is the case for riscv and nds32, merged in the
> > meantime? If not, I suggest you drop this patch altogether and just
> > define force_o_largefile() for arm64/ilp32 as we don't seem to stick to
> > "all new 32-bit architectures should have 64-bit off_t".
> 
> We (RISC-V) don't have support for rv32i in glibc yet, so there really isn't
> a fixed ABI there yet.  From my understanding the rv32i port as it currently
> stands has a 32-bit off_t (via __kernel_off_t being defined as long), so
> this change would technically be a kernel ABI break.
> 
> Since we don't have rv32i glibc yet I'm not fundamentally opposed to an ABI
> break.  Is there a concrete advantage to this?

One obvious advantage is manipulating large files - if file is greater than
2G, you cannot easily mmap(), lseek() etc with 32-bit offset.

Another point is unification of layuots for structures like struct
stat between 32- and 64-bit worlds.

On glibc side it helps to unify 32-bit and 64-bit versions of syscalls.
Refer, for example this commit:
3c7f1f59cd161 (Consolidate lseek/lseek64/llseek implementations).

Yury