[lkml]   [2010]   [Mar]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: 64-syscall args on 32-bit vs syscall()
On 03/15/2010 01:35 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-03-15 at 12:41 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> I don't see why syscall() can't change the type for its first argument
>> -- it seems to be exactly what symbol versioning is for.
>> Doesn't change the fact that it is fundamentally broken, of course.
> No need to change the type of the first arg and go for symbol
> versionning if you do something like I proposed earlier, there will be
> no conflict between syscall() and __syscall() and both variants can
> exist.

Basically symbol versioning done "by hand", actually using symbol
versioning is better, IMNSHO.


 \ /
  Last update: 2010-03-15 21:49    [W:0.064 / U:1.416 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site