On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Ralf Baechle wrote:
> Right now the 64-bit kernel interfaces are still pretty much an ad-hoc
> approach and can't be considered frozen. There is now some pressure to
> come up with a stable 64-bit API asap.
Well, they are not really used by anything, yet so they are far from
being frozen.
> As first think I want to get rid of all the historic crap we have in
> our syscall tables for the 64-bit syscalls. Let's start here:
[...]
Definitely.
> I probably missed a few. The primary purpose of this posting is to get a
> discussion about the 64-bit syscall interface started. It's still not
> cast into stone so we can modify it as we see fit. The entire syscall
> interface is still open for changes, this includes all structures etc.
> Along with a 64-bit ABI we'll also have to deciede about a N32 ABI.
It would be nice if we could keep a single set of syscalls for both (n)64
and n32. The address crop for n32 may be handled the Alpha way. I will
investigate the topic soon.
--
+ Maciej W. Rozycki, Technical University of Gdansk, Poland +
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
+ e-mail: macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl, PGP key available +
|