On 09/07/2011 11:16 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Sat, Jul 09, 2011 at 01:04:53AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> On 07/08/2011 05:35 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >>> >>> Input only need to do this compat stuff on read/write paths so maybe if >>> you add plumbing similar to compat_ioctl we could switch owver to it. >>> >> >> The problem is that read/write ties into a large number of system calls, >> and input is the *only* subsystem which needs it. >> > > BTW, while listening to x32 resentation on LPC I realized that the need > for compat tests on read/write paths in input subsystem is due to use of > timeval in input_event structures. If x32 solved the time_t issue by > moving to 64 bit times then input read/write should simply use native > 64 bit operations. > > That still leaves sysfs and proc business of course... > I thought there were pointers, (or longs) there too. In fact, we might have had the worst of both worlds here... -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
