Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 7 Apr 2014 22:25:30 +0200 | Subject | Re: [GIT PULL] ext4 changes for 3.15 | From | Geert Uytterhoeven <> |
| |
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
| |