Re: Linux 3.3-rc4

[Linus Torvalds]

On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Yep, this is what I thought, but when this was raised last september,
> both Andrew and Andi disagreed.
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/10/6/389

Well, I agree that it *could* break things, but considering that at
least glibc does the sign-exitension, any code that puts a large
number in the 'timeout' field would *already* have broken.

Which is why I think we should first try to fix the system call
interface - because it's the simpler patch, and it's the
RightThing(tm) to do from a standards standpoint. It's also almost
guaranteed to work, exactly because of how glibc already does that
conversion.

But if something does break - however unlikely and perverse the code
has to be to be able to do that - we'd clearly have to undo that "just
fix sys_poll()" and use Thomas' patch to have a compat_sys_poll()
instead.

I just don't like the notion of doing that silly compat thing when it
really shouldn't be needed to begin with.

                   Linus
--
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/