Re: [PATCH 30/30] x32: Add x32 VDSO support
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Date: 2012-02-21 03:58:45
Also in:
lkml
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Date: 2012-02-21 03:58:45
Also in:
lkml
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.