This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] signal: Use correct type for si_band in siginfo_t [BZ #23562]

From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
To: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval dot zanella at linaro dot org>
Cc: <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2018 21:45:51 +0000
Subject: Re: [PATCH] signal: Use correct type for si_band in siginfo_t [BZ #23562]
References: <877eifgpn7.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <alpine.DEB.2.21.1810221503340.15481@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <bab8c8bf-a574-9c7d-3805-c0c0b88d064e@linaro.org>

On Mon, 22 Oct 2018, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:

> I think we should XFAIL for both 32-bit and 64-bit, siginfo_t is passed

Since long int and int have the same size for 32-bit, I see no need to 
XFAIL there when you can just use the proper POSIX type without affecting 
the layout.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] signal: Use correct type for si_band in siginfo_t [BZ #23562]
  - From: Adhemerval Zanella

References:
- [PATCH] signal: Use correct type for si_band in siginfo_t [BZ #23562]
  - From: Florian Weimer
- Re: [PATCH] signal: Use correct type for si_band in siginfo_t [BZ #23562]
  - From: Joseph Myers
- Re: [PATCH] signal: Use correct type for si_band in siginfo_t [BZ #23562]
  - From: Adhemerval Zanella

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]