lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Apr]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [GIT PULL] ext4 changes for 3.15
From
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 4:07 PM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 03:15:36PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
>> >
>> > Is there anything obvious that I might be doing wrong?
>>
>> I only wired up the syscall for x86_64. Who's responsible for adding
>> all the syscall tables for the various architectures?
>
> Ah, and I was testing with i386, not x86_64, so that it explains that.
>
> It's been quite a while since I've worked to add a new system call,
> but my impressure is that in general the person who creates the new
> system call needs to reach out to the architecture maintainers
> (preferably with a patch :-), since otherwise the architecture

Preferably the creator of the new system call emails linux-arch.
Patches are always nice to have, but they may cause conflicts w.r.t.
syscall numbering.

> maintainers would have no idea that a new syscall has been added.

If i386 has the new syscall, scripts/checksyscalls.sh will catch it and
inform us about it during our next kernel build.

If you add it to x86_64 only, bad luck for anyone else ;-)

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-04-07 23:01    [W:0.113 / U:1.152 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site