On 07/07/11 20:41, Peter Mazinger wrote: > Hi, >> This fixes a problem identified by Mark Salter on C6X big-endian >> systems. We should not use "unsigned short int mode"; the proper >> type is in theory mode_t, but here we need to use kernel_mode_t >> since this structure is used for communication with the kernel, and >> some targets have a 16-bit kernel_mode_t and 32-bit mode_t. > > haven't looked closely, but if this header gets installed on target, > [__]kernel_mode_t is not/should not be defined. If the structure is > not meant to be used on target, than it should be guarded (like > _LIBC), else we should use mode_t here and handle accordingly in > code.
Accordingly meaning...? Should we translate kernel structures to user structures here? That would get really ugly. Can't we ensure that the necessary type is defined somewhere? Bernd _______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
