mirror of
https://github.com/AuxXxilium/linux_dsm_epyc7002.git
synced 2024-12-12 21:36:44 +07:00
parisc64: change __kernel_suseconds_t to match glibc
There are only two 64-bit architecture ports that have a 32-bit suseconds_t: sparc64 and parisc64. I've encountered a number of problems with this, while trying to get a proper 64-bit time_t working on 32-bit architectures. Having a 32-bit suseconds_t combined with a 64-bit time_t means that we get extra padding in data structures that may leak kernel stack data to user space, and it breaks all code that assumes that timespec and timeval have the same layout. While we can't change sparc64, it seems that glibc on parisc64 has always set suseconds_t to 'long', and the current version would give incorrect results for gettimeofday() and many other interfaces: timestamps passed from user space into the kernel result in tv_usec being always zero (the lower bits contain the intended value but are ignored) while data passed from the kernel to user space contains either zeroes or random data in tv_usec. Based on that, it seems best to change the user API in the kernel in an incompatible way to match what glibc expects. Note that the distros I could find (gentoo and debian) all just have 32-bit user space, which does not suffer from this problem. Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> Signed-off-by: Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>
This commit is contained in:
parent
e5f6d9afa3
commit
9a298b4455
@ -16,9 +16,6 @@ typedef unsigned short __kernel_mode_t;
|
|||||||
typedef unsigned short __kernel_ipc_pid_t;
|
typedef unsigned short __kernel_ipc_pid_t;
|
||||||
#define __kernel_ipc_pid_t __kernel_ipc_pid_t
|
#define __kernel_ipc_pid_t __kernel_ipc_pid_t
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
typedef int __kernel_suseconds_t;
|
|
||||||
#define __kernel_suseconds_t __kernel_suseconds_t
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
typedef long long __kernel_off64_t;
|
typedef long long __kernel_off64_t;
|
||||||
typedef unsigned long long __kernel_ino64_t;
|
typedef unsigned long long __kernel_ino64_t;
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user