Re: [PATCH] x86, pkeys: fix siginfo ABI breakage from new field
From: Stephen Rothwell
Date: Mon Feb 29 2016 - 17:54:40 EST
On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 09:01:43 +0100 Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> * Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > u32?
> > It would have to be __u32, but we already use int and unsigned int
> > extensively in the siginfo structure (which are both always assumed to
> > be 32 bits). So "unsigned int" probably makes most sense.
> No. This whole mishap is an object lesson in why it's a bad idea to ever use ABI
> types outside of the __[us][8|16|32|64] space: some of them are 'fine', some of
> them (like longs) are not.
Absolutely. I was just trying to be consistent with the rest of the structure.
Dave has submitted a follow up version which I have Acked.