From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754146Ab1IAGIt (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Sep 2011 02:08:49 -0400 Received: from mail.southpole.se ([193.12.106.18]:48009 "EHLO mail.southpole.se" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753606Ab1IAGIq (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Sep 2011 02:08:46 -0400 Subject: Re: RFD: x32 ABI system call numbers From: Jonas Bonn To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , Christoph Hellwig , Linus Torvalds , LKML , "H.J. Lu" , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Richard Kuo , Mark Salter , Tobias Klauser Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2011 08:08:03 +0200 In-Reply-To: <201108311814.54906.arnd@arndb.de> References: <4E582577.2060805@zytor.com> <201108301409.27527.arnd@arndb.de> <4E5D1153.5030908@zytor.com> <201108311814.54906.arnd@arndb.de> Organization: South Pole Consulting AB Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-CrmFQ2262uBINVU0x203" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.1.5- Message-ID: <1314857296.11447.17.camel@satguru> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Assp-Client-SSL: yes Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --=-CrmFQ2262uBINVU0x203 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 18:14 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tuesday 30 August 2011, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > On 08/30/2011 05:09 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > >=20 > > > I'm wondering about the time_t changes: given that we are still addin= g > > > new 32 bit architectures, should we change the asm-generic API as wel= l > > > to use 64 bit time_t by default (with fallbacks for the existing ones= )? > > >=20 > > > If you are adding support for these in x32 already, we could use the > > > same code for regular 32 bit architectures. > > >=20 > >=20 > > It seems absolutely boggling insane that we're introducing new > > architectures with no legacy whatsoever and use 32-bit time_t on those. >=20 > I've added a few people to Cc who are in various stages of the > process to finalize their upstream kernel ports. It's clearly > the right decision to have time_t 64-bit eventually, the question > is how much work is everyone willing to spend in the short run, > and who is going to test it. In particular, openrisc has just > been merged, so we should not be changing it any more unless > there is a serious problem, but if there is not much legacy user > space with the current ABI yet, it may still be worth switching > over. As far as OpenRISC is concerned, this change can still be made now. I know who the users of this platform are and, considering the rest of the libc churn that comes with dropping the legacy syscalls, I can guarantee that nobody's going to complain. OpenRISC may be merged but 3.1's not released yet so there's still a bit of wiggle room to get this done. /Jonas --=-CrmFQ2262uBINVU0x203 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAk5fIUMACgkQ70gcjN2673OGzQCfffacfIdfJ85u7pjDKy+M6qDZ Qd8Ani3I+PnBAV6gpAc7VJpHv5HpBXCa =zomY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-CrmFQ2262uBINVU0x203--