This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH 2/2] time: Add padding for the timespec if required
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Lukasz Majewski <lukma at denx dot de>
- Cc: Alistair Francis <alistair23 at gmail dot com>, Alistair Francis <alistair dot francis at wdc dot com>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 16:24:41 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] time: Add padding for the timespec if required
- Ironport-sdr: q0FZ3zt7jf2yAQfc3Bf+laCnOCGkJo64CeCjAT8NOw1ePUIh2iZFJfLA0iuCl9eayyHAZJEa2k 8lVNly8O9IQn7u8NM1BCEDm1q9LF657TjNpItedRBhT60v8YD3veGBsBn8d3U1t+c20sJTQpNd p7qkOk9DnJDNgNrGfJuZbN9G5NElHYm74+v3JS//mQi+vkkLfGdHdie1+NIsKOqo9wR3GqZF2h tBQSTywAvpcihIlZMCwCkaGDjd3nNjnk+TXZpeh9KLWY5SHEnmEbEl7WzcmN5AYVx7drkDvWNf qY4=
- Ironport-sdr: 4yc7XaDpfnV0BAnlpjrTIiLVnC3t17WPu+Kc9hfGAxI4sKgkG+1/NgblXf/vov1Vq6nye3cxUz mjhEROakEfNWeRcGlxk7xQ7AMfO68pQZOYvln/1UxgKeJU/NNenRQFrhYltCmmtrixoYFO5ldC o1UyrT80Hm+jinBhZ0yDPvAsEnl+jclCphqu5f7nEuLC1KR/KHkc4UQ9U2tgFXLjhSjde22R4w PFBUJgpQz3vQu5c6w7LroOQSlelefgLva369caSFBpZrF0NfEGW7whGKA47RAOteSGzDnJRjA0 Tcs=
- References: <20190925002903.15928-1-alistair.francis@wdc.com> <20190925002903.15928-2-alistair.francis@wdc.com> <alpine.DEB.2.21.1909250054220.14213@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <CAKmqyKMbr=LUOJrBbAA+oUR6dEOTh5vHohh_azeSJENMBBdQOw@mail.gmail.com> <20190925115016.1ac80af1@jawa>
On Wed, 25 Sep 2019, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> > > > +#if __WORDSIZE == 64 \
> > > > + || (defined __SYSCALL_WORDSIZE && __SYSCALL_WORDSIZE == 64) ||
> > > > \
> > > > + __TIMESIZE == 32
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ - this may be a bit problematic as 32 bit
> systems (with __TIMESIZE == 32) gain support for 64 bit time
> (so the Y2038 problem is solved).
>
> Those systems also would require padding (the code below).
>
> However, I do guess that allowing such systems to have the
> extra padding after this patch (by removing __TIMESIZE==32
> condition) is not an option for now (and shall be done in the
> same commit which introduces -D_TIME_BITS=64 support to glibc)
> ?
Yes, support for _TIME_BITS=64 should end up as one large commit that adds
all the header support, all the function exports and symbol versions, all
the ABI baseline updates and all the documentation. (It may well be split
into several pieces to review, but should still end up as one commit to
avoid intermediate states where some interfaces have _TIME_BITS=64 support
and some don't, so compiling with _TIME_BITS=64 gives a broken ABI.)
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com