[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a2=X5tPppmcV4x9=pyodiPfoq=tA5jVKuMwA1nKJe=_bA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2021 14:37:12 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Michael Forney <mforney@...rney.org>,
ALSA Development Mailing List <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...aro.org>, y2038 Mailman List <y2038@...ts.linaro.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Baolin Wang <baolin.wang7@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH v7 8/9] ALSA: add new 32-bit
layout for snd_pcm_mmap_status/control
On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 2:06 PM Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 08, 2021 at 11:24:39AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >
> > I've tried to understand this part of musl's convert_ioctl_struct(), but I just
> > can't figure out whether it does the conversion based the on the layout that
> > is currently used in the kernel, or based on the layout we should have been
> > using, and would use with the above fix. Rich, can you help me here?
>
> If the attempted 64-bit ioctl is missing (ENOTTY), it does the
> conversion to the legacy 32-bit one and retries with that, then
> converts the results back to the 64-bit form.
I understand that it tries to do that.
The part that I'm not sure about is which of the two possible
64-bit forms it's using -- the broken one we have defined in the
kernel headers, or the one we were trying to define but failed.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
