linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [parisc-linux] [PATCH] Add key management syscalls to non-i386 archs

To: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] [PATCH] Add key management syscalls to non-i386 archs
From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 17:16:17 +0100
Cc: torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org, discuss@x86-64.org, linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@m17n.org, linux-390@vm.marist.edu, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc64-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk, parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org
In-reply-to: <20041020154922.GV16153@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <20041020154922.GV16153@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> <3506.1098283455@redhat.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: EMH/1.14.1 SEMI/1.14.5 (Awara-Onsen) FLIM/1.14.5 (Demachiyanagi) APEL/10.6 Emacs/21.3 (i386-redhat-linux-gnu) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI)
> Um, no.  Should be ENTRY_COMP() if there's compat syscalls.

Not all archs (of which PA-Risc is an example) seem to require the same fixups
on the same syscalls. In some instances, the upper half of the register is
implicitly zero on 32-bit syscall entry to a 64-bit kernel. In such cases,
none of my syscalls require fixing up, assuming the pointers are automatically
correct.

> And those particular syscall numbers have already been assigned (blame Linus
> for dropping the PA-RISC patch on the floor instead of including it in
> 2.6.9).

There's not a lot I can do about that, except wave a patch under Linus's nose
and see who complains. Can you allocate three syscall numbers for me for
parisc?

David

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>