This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH v9] y2038: Introduce the __ASSUME_TIME64_SYSCALLS define
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Alistair Francis <alistair23 at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Zack Weinberg <zackw at panix dot com>, Alistair Francis <alistair dot francis at wdc dot com>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, Lukasz Majewski <lukma at denx dot de>
- Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 21:55:24 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v9] y2038: Introduce the __ASSUME_TIME64_SYSCALLS define
- Ironport-sdr: yl21C6Fq1GF8lfXZmlnvSPyplRCYlYscmKgbtv4vHrxuUUIUSv6Vf1OTw5Imgpi9wEBuN4rY/B f8D4wb1TzWP8nrvHtsHHmyYyZmvNP8DYgnJAfdMbhtDlXksQpWJcKA0/rgvtT8fMNs7Rr5IJ01 DOz6OMKb451CMhsmO3iv27JoQ3WG/L0xstT7LjQdcxbLvWKxoNqCm3tuKlOFl3l8odnMmsMJRM Cgx5C20G/zl7obiBfXGbhapae6dQInGp9Pca5XNEmzd/0dE1KKBc+3PMLB+ONVTAeFTk/bqXik Gac=
- Ironport-sdr: 2unaNfOc4c5HGnNKceBJhS3Dc6uusbbqY/nXAMJPzt/aTOkRrduFTyiil7Rzy5HUCf+0DCjc5B fOcWoyLuV8ek1QEHG/hX8n6sgkTyBwIXruUPUuZa0dhhhhpePrXkMs/UQKbbrDpmVcigVotfeW BoBMIkSdXJDGn3Bj6HAnv6C6PZfcwhiT0d0qOQBDlAa5F1LGi3NITFgFJiN/Dv6fYTjN98p8xD din6Z9XfuqFLdsu0EqoIcmww8g0tz00opSV4SJVoZE28rr0/NSxQeApMGAA2zjOTF+D9JoG21K FSM=
- References: <20190827173015.24370-1-alistair.francis@wdc.com> <CAKCAbMiYinyQ_Gdcu94rPCm6PNw6hdq+H_dhzeADa89v2z13-A@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.21.1908271926030.31674@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <CAKmqyKO5zjR8+TBHThm+6BcPe+mo77jMMgwaLKUASVhyYdAq3w@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, 27 Aug 2019, Alistair Francis wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 12:35 PM Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 27 Aug 2019, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> >
> > > I think that gets everything important. Neither the commit message
> > > nor the comment needs to list all the new system calls.
> >
> > The syscalls need to be listed to make clear exactly what the interfaces
> > covered by the macro are.
>
> I'm a little confused, should I change anything or leave the patch as is?
My comments were on Zack's version (missing the list of syscalls). I
believe Zack's version is not ready to go in as is but needs further
changes for the issues I described (listing the syscalls and referring to
the possibility that they may be suffixed or unsuffixed).
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com