This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] ARM64: ILP32: use __fsword_t in generic/bits/statfs.h
- From: Bamvor Jian Zhang <bamvor dot zhangjian at huawei dot com>
- To: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf at ezchip dot com>
- Cc: "Pinski, Andrew" <Andrew dot Pinski at caviumnetworks dot com>, "libc-alpha at sourceware dot org" <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, "apinski at cavium dot com" <apinski at cavium dot com>, "yangyingliang at huawei dot com" <yangyingliang at huawei dot com>, "bintian dot wang at huawei dot com" <bintian dot wang at huawei dot com>, "dingtianhong at huawei dot com" <dingtianhong at huawei dot com>, <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>, zhangjian <bamvor dot zhangjian at huawei dot com>
- Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 19:22:07 +0800
- Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] ARM64: ILP32: use __fsword_t in generic/bits/statfs.h
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1426674611-26427-1-git-send-email-bamvor dot zhangjian at huawei dot com> <1426674611-26427-3-git-send-email-bamvor dot zhangjian at huawei dot com>,<550AFBE6 dot 1000402 at ezchip dot com> <405BEB99-764E-474B-A3E0-7225FDE6596C at caviumnetworks dot com> <550B007A dot 9090407 at ezchip dot com> <550B95D4 dot 6020405 at huawei dot com> <550C225B dot 6000802 at ezchip dot com> <550F7CBC dot 8070403 at huawei dot com> <55103396 dot 3040809 at ezchip dot com>
On 2015/3/23 23:39, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> On 03/22/2015 10:38 PM, Bamvor Jian Zhang wrote:
>>> I assume you are planning to push all this stuff to glibc via Marcus or
>>> >some other ARM maintainer, so I don't need to push this for you. Let me
>>> >know if that's not the case.
>> Well, it sounds that it is not this case. This patch does not depend on the
>> aarch64 ilp32 patch from Andrew and does not depend on any aarch64 specific
>> code either. While the other two patches of mine depend on Andrew's ILP32
>> patches.
>> It would be great this single patch could be applied first.
>
> OK. Please repost with an appropriate ChangeLog entry and I can
> commit for you. I don't know if you've done the commit paperwork
> but in any case I would say this patch counts as legally trivial.
Thanks. I will add the ChangeLog in the next version.
> Thanks.
>