| To: | Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH, RFC] MIPS: Implement the getcontext API |
| From: | "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com> |
| Date: | Sat, 18 Apr 2009 17:32:48 +0000 (UTC) |
| Cc: | "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@codesourcery.com>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, libc-ports@sourceware.org, "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org> |
| In-reply-to: | <20090418123815.GA21240@linux-mips.org> |
| Original-recipient: | rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
| References: | <alpine.DEB.1.10.0902282326580.4064@tp.orcam.me.uk> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0904152018070.3560@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <20090418123815.GA21240@linux-mips.org> |
| Sender: | linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org |
On Sat, 18 Apr 2009, Ralf Baechle wrote: > On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 08:19:33PM +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > > > > Here is code to implement the getcontext API for MIPS. This glibc patch > > > is sent to the linux-mips mailing list, because it makes use of an > > > internal syscall which has not been designated as a part of the public > > > ABI. I am writing to request this syscall to become fixed as a part of > > > the ABI or to seek for an alternative. See below for the rationale. > > > > Was there any conclusion about whether the assumptions this patch makes > > about the kernel are OK (and so it can go in) or not? > > I've probably not spelled it out clearly enough in an earlier email on > this topic but yes, I think it's ok. In all reality the stackframe has > de facto become a part of the ABI that needs to be kept stable. Thanks - I've now committed the patch. -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [ANN] loongson-dev mailing list, Zhang Le |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH] DMA: TXx9 Soc DMA Controller driver (v2), Dan Williams |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH, RFC] MIPS: Implement the getcontext API, Ralf Baechle |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH, RFC] MIPS: Implement the getcontext API, Maciej W. Rozycki |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |