Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2011 11:13:05 +0100 From: Ben Laurie <ben@links.org> To: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: _LP64 and _ILP32 Message-ID: <4DEB56B1.2040309@links.org> In-Reply-To: <526C5DC0-F449-457D-8B25-8887BEFE869A@bsdimp.com> References: <4DEA988C.5030003@links.org> <526C5DC0-F449-457D-8B25-8887BEFE869A@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 05/06/2011 06:03, Warner Losh wrote: > I'd add them for all !_LP64 architectures: arm, mips o32, mips n32, i386, and powerpc... Forgive the stupid question, but ... add them to what? > > Warner > > On Jun 4, 2011, at 2:41 PM, Ben Laurie wrote: > >> It turns out that both clang and gcc define _LP64 when used native on amd64. >> >> Neither defines _ILP32 on i386 (native or cross-compiled). >> >> dt_popc() in cddl/contrib/opensolaris/lib/libdtrace/common/dt_subr.c >> needs on or the other. clang notices because when _ILP32 is missing >> there's no return. >> >> So ... thoughts?-- >> >> http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html http://www.links.org/ >> >> "There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he >> doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff >> >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> >> > > -- http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html http://www.links.org/ "There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4DEB56B1.2040309>