lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Dec]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [PATCH] Unicore architecture patch review, part 2
Date


> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-arch-
> owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Arnd Bergmann
> Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2010 8:54 PM
> To: Guan Xuetao
> Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Unicore architecture patch review, part 2
>
> On Wednesday 08 December 2010, Guan Xuetao wrote:
>
> > > > @@ -0,0 +1,390 @@
> > > > +/* 0 */ CALL(sys_restart_syscall)
> > > > + CALL(sys_exit)
> > > > + CALL(sys_fork_wrapper)
> > > > + CALL(sys_read)
> > > > + CALL(sys_write)
> > > > +/* 5 */ CALL(sys_open)
> > > > + CALL(sys_close)
> > >
> > > When you start using the generic unistd.h file, you can also replace
> > > this table with something like arch/tile/kernel/sys.c.
> > Well. I will use the generic unistd.h in UniCore-64 version.
>
> I thought you had agreed to break ABI compatibility with your existing
code
> base and use the generic ABI everywhere.
>
> Did I misunderstand you or did you make up your mind since then?
>
We do define new 32-bit ABI work at present, and I will use generic unistd
in new ABI.
But existing machines must be maintained, so many codes need remain
compatibility.
Then, it would be a long-term work, and 64-bit coding will be before that.

Guan Xuetao



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-12-09 04:41    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans