On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 4:51 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> The sane thing would seem to be to change __BITS_PER_LONG to 32 on x32
> and fix the padding hacks in struct shmid64_ds; H.J., would you agree?
Ugh. That looks like a disaster.
The padding hacks that depend on __BITS_PER_LONG seem pretty damn broken anyway.
They only work if the kernel agrees with the value (which is against
the whole point of making __BITS_PER_LONG be about some user-level ABI
thing) or for little-endian machines.
IOW, all the __BITS_PER_LONG games look totally broken to me. I can't
see how they could possibly even be fixed.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
