Messages in this thread | | | From | Geert Uytterhoeven <> | Date | Fri, 11 Jan 2019 09:07:43 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 00/15] arch: synchronize syscall tables in preparation for y2038 |
| |
Hi Arnd,
On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 11:43 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 7:11 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 6:06 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 5:59 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 5:26 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: > > > > > The system call tables have diverged a bit over the years, and a number > > > > > of the recent additions never made it into all architectures, for one > > > > > reason or another. > > > > > > > > > > This is an attempt to clean it up as far as we can without breaking > > > > > compatibility, doing a number of steps: > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot! > > > > > > > > > - Add system calls that have not yet been integrated into all > > > > > architectures but that we definitely want there. > > > > > > > > It looks like you missed wiring up io_pgetevents() on m68k. > > > > Is that intentional? > > > > > > Yes, I thought I had described that somewhere but maybe I > > > forgot: semtimedop() and io_pgetevents() get replaced with > > > time64 versions in the follow-up, so I only added them in > > > 64-bit architectures. If you think we should have both > > > io_pgetevents() and io_pgetevents_time32() on all 32-bit > > > architectures, I can add that as well. > > > > Thanks, sounds fine to me. > > Just to be sure, you mean it's fine to not add it, not that we should > add it?
I'm fine with not having the legacy 32-bit ones.
Sorry for being unclear.
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
| |