On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 11:40 PM Joseph Myers [off-list ref] wrote:

On Mon, 18 Feb 2019, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

quoted

We don't yet have an upstream glibc port for csky, so there is no user

We do.  It's in 2.29.

...
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 3:18 AM Guo Ren [off-list ref] wrote:

Mao Han has merged csky port into glibc 2.29, so we should keep the
__ARCH_WANT_TIME32_SYSCALLS.

My mistake. I've dropped patch 7/8 from this series now.

quoted

diff --git a/arch/csky/Kconfig b/arch/csky/Kconfig
index 6959e0b1e956..398113c845f5 100644
--- a/arch/csky/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/csky/Kconfig

@@ -1,6 +1,5 @@
 config CSKY
      def_bool y
-     select ARCH_32BIT_OFF_T
      select ARCH_HAS_SYNC_DMA_FOR_CPU
      select ARCH_HAS_SYNC_DMA_FOR_DEVICE
      select ARCH_USE_BUILTIN_BSWAP

diff --git a/arch/csky/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h b/arch/csky/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h
index ec60e49cea66..224c9a9ab45b 100644
--- a/arch/csky/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h
+++ b/arch/csky/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h

@@ -2,8 +2,6 @@
 // Copyright (C) 2018 Hangzhou C-SKY Microsystems co.,ltd.

 #define __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE
-#define __ARCH_WANT_SET_GET_RLIMIT

Seems it's not related to y2038 issue. Is __ARCH_WANT_SET_GET_RLIMIT no
use ?

In new architectures, we do not need to set CONFIG_ARCH_32BIT_OFF_T
or __ARCH_WANT_SET_GET_RLIMIT, since we can assume that user
space always uses a 64-bit off_t and a 'struct rlimit' matching the
kernel's rlimit64, with the prlimit64() system call replacing both getrlimit
and setrlimit on the kernel/user ABI side.

I don't know if glibc still uses the 32-bit off_t behavior or the old
getrlimit/setrlimit, but if we're not also changing the time32 interfaces,
the safest option seems to be to leave all three in place.

     Arnd

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel