This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] alpha bits/mman.h vs mman-linux.h
- From: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at redhat dot com>
- To: Richard Henderson <rth at twiddle dot net>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Cc: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2013 11:48:43 -0500
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] alpha bits/mman.h vs mman-linux.h
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <52A1FBFA dot 9030107 at twiddle dot net>
On 12/06/2013 11:31 AM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> Joseph mentions in the wiki that alpha isn't using <bits/mman-linux.h>. I'd
> been avoiding this because mman-linux.h isn't quite as configurable as it might
> be, but here's a first cut.
> Is this reasonable, with the undefs? Ought I play more with __FOO as we
> already do for __MAP_ANONYMOUS?
I think it is.
It's the approach I think the upstream kernel needs to make to cleanup mman.h.
See my upstream linux RFC here:
For each target:
(a) Include a common mman.h
(b) Undef everything that's wrong.
(c) Define your own changes.
I did a lot of review work for that RFC, there are a lot of things that could
go into mman-linux.h to make the final files smaller.