lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1997]   [Jan]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: 2.1.18: Bad syscall number for new query_module syscall
    On Tue, 31 Dec 1996, Henrik Storner wrote:

    > new query_module syscall - it's set to 166, but should be 167 (166
    > is the improved vm86 syscall introduced in 2.1.15).

    Right! 166 _is_ the new vm86 syscall.

    > BTW, anyone from the dosemu group want to comment on whether the old
    > or the new vm86 syscall should be named "vm86" ? To avoid name
    > clashes, perhaps the new vm86 syscall (166) should be "vm86plus" ...

    Ooops. I have to admit, this one was forgotten :-( sorry, my fault.
    (we 'hand coded' it in dosemu-0.64.2.1, because it isn't in the libs yet)

    >
    > --- linux/include/asm-i386/unistd.h.orig Tue Dec 31 11:47:31 1996
    > +++ linux/include/asm-i386/unistd.h Tue Dec 31 11:50:13 1996
    > @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@
    > -#define __NR_vm86 113
    > +#define __NR_vm86old 113
    > +#define __NR_vm86 166
    > +#define __NR_query_module 167

    If I understand Linus right, the new vm86 should replace the old one,
    while preserving _binary_ compatibility (syscall 113 translates to 166)
    For new compiled stuff, the libc and/or the application should be adapted.
    So the above naming seems correct to me.
    (though we have nothing against naming the syscall-166 vm86plus)

    Hans
    <lermen@fgan.de>


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:36    [W:5.559 / U:0.008 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site