|To:||Ralf Baechle <email@example.com>|
|Subject:||Re: 64-bit and N32 kernel interfaces|
|From:||Jun Sun <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Date:||Wed, 04 Sep 2002 10:32:42 -0700|
|Cc:||"Maciej W. Rozycki" <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org|
|References:||<20020904155645.A31893@linux-mips.org> <Pine.GSO.3.96.1020904160219.10619Gemail@example.com> <20020904163101.C32519@linux-mips.org>|
|User-agent:||Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.9) Gecko/20020408|
Ralf Baechle wrote:
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 04:14:13PM +0200, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: The primary problem is the differnet calling sequence for o32 and N64. As it looks we'll be able to use either the o32 function or the native syscall to implement all of the necessary N32 syscalls.
For 64bit kernel, do we intend to have one syscall table that support o32, n32 and n64 altogether? Or we will have multiple tables for them?
The question is if we want to reserve another 1000 entries in our already huge syscall table for N32 or if we got a better solution ...
It seems n32 can be naturally implemented through n64 syscalls, although I am sure there are some nasty details to work out.
Where can I find n32/n64 spec? Jun
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||Re: root-nfs hang and error, George Gensure|
|Next by Date:||Re: 64-bit and N32 kernel interfaces, Maciej W. Rozycki|
|Previous by Thread:||Re: 64-bit and N32 kernel interfaces, Daniel Jacobowitz|
|Next by Thread:||Re: 64-bit and N32 kernel interfaces, Maciej W. Rozycki|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|