From: David Mosberger <davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com>
To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: IA64 ino_t incorrectly sized?
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 16:32:24 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <marc-linux-ia64-106623593125943@msgid-missing> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <marc-linux-ia64-106378281914262@msgid-missing>
>>>>> On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 16:34:09 +1000, Nathan Scott <nathans@sgi.com> said:
Nathan> On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 11:21:09PM -0700, David Mosberger
Nathan> wrote:
>> >>>>> On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 16:06:02 +1000, Nathan Scott
>> <nathans@sgi.com> said:
Nathan> It turns out that neither is a problem for us in practice.
>> Sounds find to me, then. Except, I'd replace #ifdef __ia64__
>> with #ifdef CONFIG_IA64, so you're relying (less) on compiler
>> magic.
Nathan> Oh. I had avoided that because it requires any sources
Nathan> including these headers to have already included
Nathan> linux/config.h, which they may not be doing. linux/types.h
Nathan> is included by userspace code too, I believe, so may be an
Nathan> issue there too.
OK.
Upon further investigation, I found that glibc defines its own "struct
ustat" and, guess what, it already declare __ino_t as unsigned long:
(gdb) ptype struct ustat
type = struct ustat {
__daddr_t f_tfree;
__ino_t f_tinode;
char f_fname[6];
char f_fpack[6];
}
(gdb) ptype __ino_t
type = long unsigned int
So there is no need to have that ugly #ifdef for struct ustat.
I'm not 100% sure yet what to do about NFS.
--david
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-10-15 16:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-09-17 7:10 IA64 ino_t incorrectly sized? Nathan Scott
2003-09-17 14:33 ` Jes Sorensen
2003-09-17 17:26 ` David Mosberger
2003-09-29 5:52 ` Nathan Scott
2003-10-08 23:51 ` David Mosberger
2003-10-09 1:25 ` Nathan Scott
2003-10-09 1:57 ` David Mosberger
2003-10-09 3:15 ` Nathan Scott
2003-10-09 3:53 ` David Mosberger
2003-10-09 4:55 ` Nathan Scott
2003-10-09 20:46 ` David Mosberger
2003-10-10 2:22 ` Nathan Scott
2003-10-15 1:25 ` Nathan Scott
2003-10-15 1:48 ` Andrew Morton
2003-10-15 4:47 ` David Mosberger
2003-10-15 5:18 ` Andrew Morton
2003-10-15 6:06 ` Nathan Scott
2003-10-15 6:16 ` Nathan Scott
2003-10-15 6:21 ` David Mosberger
2003-10-15 6:28 ` Andrew Morton
2003-10-15 6:34 ` Nathan Scott
2003-10-15 12:42 ` Andi Kleen
2003-10-15 12:54 ` Christoph Hellwig
2003-10-15 13:29 ` Matthew Wilcox
2003-10-15 13:40 ` Christoph Hellwig
2003-10-15 16:32 ` David Mosberger [this message]
2003-10-15 16:59 ` David Mosberger
2003-10-15 17:40 ` David Mosberger
2003-10-15 23:40 ` Neil Brown
2003-10-16 1:20 ` David Mosberger
2003-10-16 22:47 ` Nathan Scott
2003-10-17 0:47 ` Neil Brown
2003-10-17 1:56 ` Nathan Scott
2003-10-21 3:37 ` Neil Brown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=marc-linux-ia64-106623593125943@msgid-missing \
--to=davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.