Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2011 23:03:10 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Ben Laurie <ben@links.org> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: _LP64 and _ILP32 Message-ID: <526C5DC0-F449-457D-8B25-8887BEFE869A@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <4DEA988C.5030003@links.org> References: <4DEA988C.5030003@links.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I'd add them for all !_LP64 architectures: arm, mips o32, mips n32, = i386, and powerpc... 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. >=20 > Neither defines _ILP32 on i386 (native or cross-compiled). >=20 > 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. >=20 > So ... thoughts?-- >=20 > http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html http://www.links.org/ >=20 > "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 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > 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" >=20 >=20
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?526C5DC0-F449-457D-8B25-8887BEFE869A>