On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Mark Butler <butl...@middle.net> wrote:
>
>
> On Tuesday, June 26, 2012 3:22:45 PM UTC-6, H.J. wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Mark Butler wrote:
>> >
>> >> x32 is designed to replace ia32 where long is 32-bit, not x86-64.
>> >>
>> > I understand, but wouldn't L64P32 be much better in the long run? In
>> > terms
>> > of compatibility with LP64, and an LP64 kernel in particular? The
>> > structure
>> > layouts of any structure that did not contain pointers would be
>> > identical,
>> > for example. struct timeval, struct timespec, struct stat, and on and
>> > on...
>>
>> Linux/x32 uses the same layout for struct timeval, struct timespec, struct
>> stat,
>> as Linux/x86-64. It is orthogonal to L64 vs L32.
>>
> If POSIX requires struct timespec to look like this:
>
> struct timespec {
> time_t tv_sec;
> long tv_nsec;
> }
>
> then how can an ABI with 32 bit longs have the same struct timespec layout
> as an ABI with 64 bit longs?
>
We changed it to
struct timespec
{
__time_t tv_sec; /* Seconds. */
__syscall_slong_t tv_nsec; /* Nanoseconds. */
};
--
H.J.
