This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH 3/4] ELF/BFD: Handle both variants of the 64-bit Linux core PRPSINFO note

On Sunday, September 24 2017, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:

> On Sat, 23 Sep 2017, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote:
>> I noticed that you put the most common definition at the top in the
>> previous patch (32-bit), but now you're putting the most common at the
>> bottom.  I'd prefer if you could put the most common at the top and the
>> specific one at the bottom for both 32- and 64-bit cases.
>  I placed both 32-bit UID/GID versions ahead of their respective 16-bit 
> counterparts, recognising that the 32-bit versions are the default in BFD, 
> which in turns follows Linux's <asm-generic/posix_types.h> default.  The 
> 32-bit UID/GID versions are also the predominant choice in Linux, for both 
> 32-bit ports (ARC, Blackfin, TI C6X, H8/300, Hexagon*, Meta, MicroBlaze, 
> MIPS, Nios II, OpenRISC, PA-RISC, PowerPC, TILE, UniCore-32*, Xtensa) and 
> 64-bit ports (all except SuperH).
>  I hope it clarifies my choice and I think it makes sense this way.
>   Maciej
> [*] Binutils port not upstream.

Sure, thanks for explaining.  I understand it's a matter of taste and as
I said, it's really a nitpick.  I still think the patch is good as is
and a nice improvement to the current situation.

GPG key ID: 237A 54B1 0287 28BF 00EF  31F4 D0EB 7628 65FC 5E36
Please send encrypted e-mail if possible

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]