linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] Fix some system calls with long long arguments

To: linux-mips@linux-mips.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix some system calls with long long arguments
From: Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 10:35:11 +0900 (JST)
Cc: ralf@linux-mips.org, kraj@mvista.com, libc-ports@sourceware.org
In-reply-to: <20070309.003749.39154822.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <20070307.003931.25235381.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> <20070307.231410.15268922.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> <20070309.003749.39154822.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
On Fri, 09 Mar 2007 00:37:49 +0900 (JST), Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> 
wrote:
> > fadvise64(), readahead(), sync_file_range() have long long argument(s)
> > but glibc passes it by hi/lo pair without padding, on both O32 and
> > N32.
> > 
> > Also wire up fadvise64_64() and fixup confusion of it with
> > fadvise64().
> 
> If best performance was preferred, the O32 readahead and
> sync_file_range should not changed and libc should provide MIPS
> specific syscall wrappers, like pread64.  The N32 can also use
> standard sys_readahead(), etc. and libc should provide wrappers, too.
> 
> Anyway fadvice64() needs to be fixed.
> 
> Any comments from libc side?  Original patch is here:
> http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/2007-03/msg00092.html

Any comments?

I think this patch has less maintainance cost but a little bit slow.

These syscalls can be a little bit faster, but needs more works on
glibc (and uClibc, etc.) side.

Anyway we should take some action while current implementation is
broken (except N64).

Which is a way to go?

---
Atsushi Nemoto

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