On 5 December 2012 14:07, Markos Chandras <[email protected]> wrote: > On 4 December 2012 12:46, Vineet Gupta <[email protected]> wrote: >> Also AFAIKR the last time we discussed, we'd agreed to try and remove >> any 64 to 32 translation layer. So my no-legacy-syscalls uClibc 0.9.30.3 >> (still work in progress) doesn't have a kernel_stat64 struct at all. >> I'll get back to you with my tentative patches in this regard. > > Hi Vineet, > > There are indeed many ways to solve this problem. What I have at this > point is the following layout > > /libc/sysdeps/linux/common-no-legacy/bits/statfs.h > > which includes a statfs and a statfs64 structure where the statfs > structure matches the layout of statfs64 but with 32-bit members and > padding. > > Similarly, I have > > /libc/sysdeps/linux/common-no-legacy/bits/stat.h > > again, this file includes a stat structure and a sta64 structure where > the stat structure matches the layout of stat64 but with 32-bit > members and > padding. > > Finally, there is the kernel_stat{64} problem. Right now, every > architecture defines its own kernel_stat{64} structures. However, new > architectures share the same stat structure > (include/uapi/asm-generic/stat.h). Moreover, kernel_stat and/or > kernel_stat64 are used internally in uClibc so I created a separate > file in > > libc/sysdeps/linux/common-no-legacy/bits/kernel_stat.h which just > includes <sys/stat.h> and does the following > > #define kernel_stat stat > #define kernel_stat64 stat64 > > Personally, I see no reason to redefine kernel_stat{64} structure with > a layout similar to stat/stat64. > > With these changes, no 32->64 translation is required. > > Any thoughts? > > -- > Regards, > Markos
Oh I sent this e-mail a couple of seconds before you send yours. Good timing :) -- Regards, Markos _______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
