Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 9 Apr 2014 19:48:32 +0200 | Subject | Re: [GIT PULL] ext4 changes for 3.15 | From | Geert Uytterhoeven <> |
| |
Hi Peter,
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 6:55 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote: > On 04/09/2014 09:40 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote: >>> On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 10:25:30PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >>>>> 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 ;-) >>> >>> Maybe we should change scripts/checksyscalls.sh to check the x86_64 >>> list of syscalls, and not i386? >>> >>> It's been a long time since "all the world's an i386" --- these days, >>> it's "all the world's an x86_64". :-) >> >> Let the kbuild people (and their employers) fight over it... >> > > I'm missing context here, but as an x86 maintainer I have no intention > of allowing system calls that aren't x86-specific to be added to x86-64 > only.
commit 520c8b16505236fc82daa352e6c5e73cd9870cff Author: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz> Date: Tue Apr 1 17:08:42 2014 +0200
vfs: add renameat2 syscall
It was added to arch/x86/syscalls/syscall_64.tbl only.
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
| |