On Sat, Jan 13, 2001 at 05:06:16PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2001 at 06:43:23PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > Anton, you write:
> > > Have a look at 2.4, arch/sparc64/kernel/ioctl32.c
> >
> > Yuk.
> >
> > > Would it be possible to clean up the ioctl interface so we dont need
> > > such large hacks for LVM support? I can do the work but I want to be
> > > sure you guys will agree to it.
If you're prepared to do the work we'd be glad to accept the patch - please send
it to me or the list so I can check over it before committing it. As we don't
have an UltraSPARC available for testing it's probably better done by someone
who does !
> > What is the reason for all this? Alignment/wordsize/other? If you look
> > at the IOP10 code, much of the in-core data structs were changed to int
> > or long, so this sparc code may not be necessary.
>
> The longs are the biggest problem AFAICS.
> long is 64bit on sparc64 and 32bit on sparc32...
There are still a few ulong members in lvm.h, they should be uint32_t
patrick
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
