Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1385360 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH 18/25] arm64: ilp32: introduce binfmt_ilp32.c

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH 18/25] arm64: ilp32: introduce binfmt_ilp32.c Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> - 2016-04-22 19:00 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 18/25] arm64: ilp32: introduce binfmt_ilp32.c Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> - 2016-04-22 19:50 +0200

#1385360 — Re: [PATCH 18/25] arm64: ilp32: introduce binfmt_ilp32.c

On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 01:08:40AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote:
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/binfmt_ilp32.c

[...]

> +#include "../../../fs/binfmt_elf.c"

How different is this new binfmt_ilp32.c file from the first part of
compat_binfmt_elf.c? I wonder whether we could include the latter here
instead and make this similar to binfmt_elf32.c introduced by the
previous patch.

-- 
Catalin

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1385405

On Friday 22 April 2016 17:51:30 Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 01:08:40AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote:
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/binfmt_ilp32.c
> 
> [...]
> 
> > +#include "../../../fs/binfmt_elf.c"
> 
> How different is this new binfmt_ilp32.c file from the first part of
> compat_binfmt_elf.c? I wonder whether we could include the latter here
> instead and make this similar to binfmt_elf32.c introduced by the
> previous patch.

That is how the earlier versions did it, and I thought it ended up 
too ugly with lots of runtime checks instead of compile-time checks.

The current version is how I asked it to be done. A slight
variation would be to keep using fs/compat_binfmt_elf.c for one
of the two compat modes (today it is used for aarch32) and have
a separate file include "../../../fs/binfmt_elf.c" for the other
mode (as this patch does for ilp32). I think that is what I asked
for, but there was probably a good reason for having two files
in the same directory. The result is basically the same.

	Arnd

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web