lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Jun]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectXtensa syscalls (Was: Re: 2.6.12-rc5-mm1)
Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>>Chris, are there any existing binaries that rely on your implementations
>>>of old_mmap, sys_fork, sys_vfork, sys_olduname or sys_ipc and need to
>>>work with future kernels? Otherwise, you should probably drop these.
>>>For sys_ipc, you would need to add the subcalls directly to the table,
>>>like parisc does.
> Hmm, xtensa is now in -rc1, with the obsolete syscalls still in there,
> so I guess this about the last chance to correct the ABI. Applying the
> patch obviously breaks all sorts of user space binaries and probably
> also requires the appropriate changes to be made to libc.

I have to admit, the -rc1 caught me a bit by surprise; I have a few
patches pending that I want to send out today.

The question is, if we had to break glibc compatibility, shouldn't we
use the opportunity to clean-up the syscall list? It was copied from
MIPS and, thus, has inherited a lot of legacy from there. As a new
architecture, maybe we should even go as far as removing all ni-syscalls
and start fresh?

> On the other hand, if a decision is made to keep the broken interface,
> it should at least be a conscious one instead of an oversight.

I will try out your patch and see if there are any obvious problems.

Thanks,
~Chris
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-06-29 18:27    [W:2.236 / U:0.116 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site