[PATCH v2 3/3] Consolidate posix_fadvise implementations

[Adhemerval Zanella]

On 12/10/2016 13:10, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Oct 2016, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
> 
>> By the way, do you know exactly why mips64n64 requires this symbol versioning?
> 
> See what I said in 
> <https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-ports/2012-05/msg00006.html>.  Because 
> there were releases with both symbol versions, we need to keep the exports 
> at both versions even though they have the same semantics.
> 
> Please commit the patch.
> 

Thanks, I will add a comment on mips64 posix_fadvise64 implementation
explaining why it is required.