[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: busybox
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] runsv: Use 64 prefix syscall if we have to
From: Alistair Francis <alistair.francis () wdc ! com>
Date: 2019-08-28 21:13:15
Message-ID: 20190828211315.19423-4-alistair.francis () wdc ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
Some 32-bit architectures no longer have the 32-bit time_t syscalls.
Instead they have suffixed syscalls that returns a 64-bit time_t. If
the architecture doesn't have the non-suffixed syscall and is using a
64-bit time_t let's use the suffixed syscall instead.
This fixes build issues when building for RISC-V 32-bit with 5.1+ kernel
headers.
If an architecture only supports the suffixed syscalls, but is still
using a 32-bit time_t report a compilation error. This avoids us have to
deal with converting between 64-bit and 32-bit values. There are
currently no architectures where this is the case.
Signed-off-by: Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@wdc.com>
---
runit/runsv.c | 7 +++++++
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/runit/runsv.c b/runit/runsv.c
index ccc762d78..737909b0e 100644
--- a/runit/runsv.c
+++ b/runit/runsv.c
@@ -55,7 +55,14 @@ ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
* typically requiring -lrt. We just skip all this mess */
static void gettimeofday_ns(struct timespec *ts)
{
+#if defined(__NR_clock_gettime)
syscall(__NR_clock_gettime, CLOCK_REALTIME, ts);
+#elif __TIMESIZE == 64
+ syscall(__NR_clock_gettime64, CLOCK_REALTIME, ts);
+#else
+# error "We currently don't support architectures without " \
+ "the __NR_clock_gettime syscall and 32-bit time_t"
+#endif
}
#else
static void gettimeofday_ns(struct timespec *ts)
--
2.22.0
_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
busybox@busybox.net
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic