Re: [PATCH 30/30] x32: Add x32 VDSO support

[H. Peter Anvin]

On 02/20/2012 04:12 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> 
> Would it make sense to remove the non-__vdso-prefixed weak symbols?
> AFAICT they are somewhere between useless (because the __vdso symbols
> are unambiguous), confusing (has anyone not read this and said "huh?"),
> and wrong (they are not interchangeable with glibc's symbols as they
> return different values).
> 
> We're stuck with them on x86-64, but x32 is new and has no
> backwards-compatibility issues.
> 

What about non-glibc?

	-hpa


-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/