Re: IA64 ino_t incorrectly sized?

From: Christoph Hellwig <hch_at_lst.de>
Date: 2003-10-15 23:40:49
On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 02:29:21PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 02:54:53PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 11:25:04AM +1000, Nathan Scott wrote:
> > > I'd appreciate any suggestions about a cleaner way to do the
> > > common types.h and nfsd/syscall.h header changes.
> > 
> > First question:  What about other LP64 arches besides IA64.  IMHO
> > having differen't ino_t on different LP64 arches is a rather bad idea.
> 
> All architectures typedef __kernel_ino_t to unsigned long except alpha,
> ia64 and s390x.  I guess ia64 just copied the wrong architecture at
> the beginning.

So we should probably change introduce __HAVE_BROKEN_INO_T for alpha
and s390x?  Even better those should get new versions of the relevant
syscalls, I expect at least s390x to want them one day.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Received on Wed Oct 15 09:42:16 2003

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:19 EST