[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#200215: some debug info... gdb and strace broken on casals?



On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 08:39:48PM +0200, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 20:39:48 +0200
> To: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
> Cc: Brendan O'Dea <bod@debian.org>, 200215@bugs.debian.org,
> 	Drew Scott Daniels <umdanie8@cc.UManitoba.CA>,
> 	Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org>,
> 	debian-mips@lists.debian.org, Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp>
> Subject: Re: Bug#200215: some debug info... gdb and strace broken on casals?
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> From: Thiemo Seufer <ica2_ts@csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de>
> 
> Ralf Baechle wrote:
> [snip]
> > So basically I like Thiemo's suggestion for the fix.  But - the purpose
> > of the three unused 32-bit fields in struct msgid64_ds is dealing with
> > the year 2038 problem.  So maybe we should reorder fields like:
> > 
> > [...]
> > #if defined(CONFIG_MIPS32) && !defined(CONFIG_CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN)
> > 	unsigned long	__unused1;
> > 	__kernel_time_t	msg_stime;
> > #else if defined(CONFIG_MIPS32) && defined(CONFIG_CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN)
> > 	__kernel_time_t	msg_stime;
> > 	unsigned long	__unused1;
> > #else
> > 	__kernel_time_t	msg_stime;
> > #endif
> > [...]
> > 
> > ?
> 
> This looks good for the kernel side.
> 
> > That would eventually permit extending fields to 64-bit and take care of
> > endianess issues.
> > 
> > Comments?
> 
> I missed the other endianness. Appended is the version needed for glibc.

Okay, I suggest you send this patch to Uli for libc and I'll prepare a
patch for the kernel, will post here later.

... unless anybdy thinks this patch is going to cause breakage that should
be avoided.  We could be more graceful about compatibility but at least
form my perspective that's not really worth the effort.  Last chance to
complain :-)

  Ralf



Reply to: