Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2011 11:13:12 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Ben Laurie <ben@links.org> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: _LP64 and _ILP32 Message-ID: <3653FDA9-7CBE-4217-BDE9-78E2970E89F1@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <4DEB56B1.2040309@links.org> References: <4DEA988C.5030003@links.org> <526C5DC0-F449-457D-8B25-8887BEFE869A@bsdimp.com> <4DEB56B1.2040309@links.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Jun 5, 2011, at 4:13 AM, Ben Laurie wrote: > 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? If they aren't already defined by the compilers, those compilers should be modified to define them. I thought they were defined already, it appears not. Warner >> 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 > >help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3653FDA9-7CBE-4217-BDE9-78E2970E89F1>