On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Yep, this is what I thought, but when this was raised last september, > both Andrew and Andi disagreed. > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/10/6/389 Well, I agree that it *could* break things, but considering that at least glibc does the sign-exitension, any code that puts a large number in the 'timeout' field would *already* have broken. Which is why I think we should first try to fix the system call interface - because it's the simpler patch, and it's the RightThing(tm) to do from a standards standpoint. It's also almost guaranteed to work, exactly because of how glibc already does that conversion. But if something does break - however unlikely and perverse the code has to be to be able to do that - we'd clearly have to undo that "just fix sys_poll()" and use Thomas' patch to have a compat_sys_poll() instead. I just don't like the notion of doing that silly compat thing when it really shouldn't be needed to begin with. Linus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
