On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 1:51 PM Joseph Myers <joseph@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 6 Feb 2020, Vineet Gupta wrote: > > > > If > > > you require Linux 5.1 or later for the port then all or nearly all the > > > architecture-independent pieces required for a 32-bit port supporting only > > > 64-bit times should be covered by the RV32 patches, which I think are > > > quite close to being ready to go into glibc, though you'd need to watch > > > out for any (new or existing) #ifdef conditionals that might try to use > > > 32-bit-time syscalls if they exist (which they don't on RV32) - and that > > > would not prevent supporting older kernel versions later if desired, as > > > the Y2038 support gets built out (including, in particular, the support > > > for falling back to 32-bit-time syscalls in functions for 64-bit-time > > > interfaces). > > > > Ok I see patches in flight on the mailing list. Would it make sense for me to > > start off in parallel with ARC port which will take it's due course of review and > > rework and in that process upstream y2038 work settles down and I then > > rebase/switch ARC to that. Or would rather wait for upstream to settle down and > > then I adjust/post ? > > I'd suggest posting patches that are on top of the RV32 ones (maybe > there's a git tree with RV32 changes to current glibc that could be used), > and that only support Linux 5.1 and later (so you don't need anything much > of the Y2038 support beyond what's in the RV32 patches). Go for it! My working branch is here: https://github.com/alistair23/glibc/tree/alistair/rv32.next My latest RFC branch is here: https://github.com/alistair23/glibc/tree/alistair/rv32.rfc6 Alistair > > -- > Joseph S. Myers > joseph@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ linux-snps-arc mailing list linux-snps-arc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-snps-arc
