Messages in this thread |  | | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: Where is it written? | Date | 10 Nov 2000 17:33:34 -0800 |
| |
Followup to: <11198.973906134@ocs3.ocs-net> By author: Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > On 10 Nov 2000 17:10:00 -0800, > "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> wrote: > >We can mess with the ABI, but it requires a wholescale rev of the > >entire system. > > AFAICT, there is nothing stopping us from redoing the kernel ABI to > pass the first few parameters between kernel functions in registers. > As long as the syscall interface is unchanged, that ABI change will > only break binary modules (care_factor == 0). The ABI type would need > to be added to the symbol version prefix, trivial. >
Yes, the kernel is very different; however, the big win for an ABI change is in user space.
AFAIK, I think Linus tried this once, but ran into bugs in gcc. We might very well try again in 2.5.
-hpa -- <hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |