| To: | joseph@codesourcery.com |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: 64-bit syscall ABI issue |
| From: | David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> |
| Date: | Mon, 04 Jun 2007 14:25:57 -0700 (PDT) |
| Cc: | linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.LNX.4.64.0706042051280.16431@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> |
| Original-recipient: | rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.4.64.0706042051280.16431@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> |
| Sender: | linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org |
From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com> Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 20:56:57 +0000 (UTC) [ added linux-arch which is a great place to discuss these kinds of issues. ] > What should the kernel syscall ABI be in such cases (any case where the > syscall implementations expect arguments narrower than registers, so > mainly 32-bit arguments on 64-bit platforms)? There are two obvious > possibilities: In general we've taken the stance that the syscall dispatch should create the proper calling environment for C code implementing the system calls, and this thus means properly sign and zero extending the arguments as expected by the C calling convention. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | 64-bit syscall ABI issue, Joseph S. Myers |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [PATCH 11/12] drivers: PMC MSP71xx USB driver, Marc St-Jean |
| Previous by Thread: | 64-bit syscall ABI issue, Joseph S. Myers |
| Next by Thread: | Re: 64-bit syscall ABI issue, H. Peter Anvin |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |