[lkml]   [2010]   [Mar]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: 64-syscall args on 32-bit vs syscall()
    Hash: SHA1

    On 03/16/2010 05:31 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
    > My proposal is purely a change to the syscall()
    > function, nothing else. No kernel change, no ABI change, no change to
    > the way glibc normally calls syscalls internally, etc...

    How can this be? People are today actively working around the problem
    of 64-bit arguments. You have to break something since you cannot
    recognize these situations. And since it became meanwhile clear that
    there is no way to "fix" all archs magically I really don't want to
    introduce anything. There are mechanisms in place to abstract out some
    of the issues. And for the rest, well, if you're using syscalls
    directly you already have to encoded lowlevel knowledge. One more bit
    doesn't hurt. It's not as if this happens every day.

    - --
    ➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
    Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora -

    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2010-03-17 06:55    [W:0.019 / U:2.692 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site