From: Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>
Cc: george anzinger <george@mvista.com>,
Jim Houston <jim.houston@ccur.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
anton@samba.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>,
ak@muc.de, davidm@hpl.hp.com, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com,
ralf@gnu.org, willy@debian.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] compatibility syscall layer (lets try again)
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 04:10:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20021205031037.GA31292@averell> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0212041830100.3100-100000@home.transmeta.com>
Wouldn't it be much easier to just keep the few system calls that need
to handle such magic system call restart in architecture specific
code ? There aren't that many of them. The arch part does not even
need to contain the full body of the syscall, just a wrapper around
a "do_*" function.
After all this 32bit emulation unification should be something to make
further development easier, not a cause in itself.
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-12-05 3:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 78+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-12-04 7:02 [PATCH] compatibility syscall layer (lets try again) Stephen Rothwell
2002-12-04 7:07 ` [PATCH] compatibility syscall layer - PPC64 Stephen Rothwell
2002-12-06 23:03 ` Anton Blanchard
2002-12-04 7:16 ` [PATCH] compatibility syscall layer - SPARC64 Stephen Rothwell
2002-12-04 7:18 ` [PATCH] compatibility syscall layer - X86_64 Stephen Rothwell
2002-12-04 11:29 ` Andi Kleen
2002-12-04 7:26 ` [PATCH] compatibility syscall layer - IA64 Stephen Rothwell
2002-12-04 7:37 ` David Mosberger
2002-12-04 7:28 ` [PATCH] compatibility syscall layer (lets try again) Stephen Rothwell
2002-12-04 7:29 ` [PATCH] compatibility syscall layer - PARISC Stephen Rothwell
2002-12-04 7:30 ` [PATCH] compatibility syscall layer (lets try again) Stephen Rothwell
2002-12-04 7:33 ` Stephen Rothwell
2002-12-04 11:57 ` Pavel Machek
2002-12-04 16:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-12-04 16:54 ` David S. Miller
2002-12-04 17:05 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-12-04 19:56 ` george anzinger
2002-12-04 20:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-12-04 20:56 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-12-04 22:09 ` David S. Miller
2002-12-04 22:31 ` george anzinger
2002-12-04 22:39 ` David S. Miller
2002-12-04 22:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-12-04 23:42 ` Jim Houston
2002-12-05 0:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-12-05 2:01 ` george anzinger
2002-12-05 2:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-12-05 3:10 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2002-12-05 3:46 ` george anzinger
2002-12-05 4:11 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-12-05 7:10 ` george anzinger
2002-12-05 9:48 ` george anzinger
2002-12-05 15:24 ` Jim Houston
2002-12-05 16:35 ` george anzinger
2002-12-06 0:03 ` Richard Henderson
2002-12-05 17:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-12-06 9:17 ` george anzinger
2002-12-06 17:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-12-06 19:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-12-06 20:09 ` [PATCH] compatibility syscall layer (let's " Jim Houston
2002-12-06 20:33 ` george anzinger
2002-12-06 20:18 ` [PATCH] compatibility syscall layer (lets " george anzinger
2002-12-06 21:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-12-06 21:56 ` Jim Houston
2002-12-06 22:58 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-12-07 2:25 ` george anzinger
2002-12-06 23:08 ` george anzinger
2002-12-08 20:41 ` David S. Miller
2002-12-09 6:18 ` Stephen Rothwell
2002-12-09 15:41 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-12-09 16:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-12-09 17:27 ` David Mosberger
2002-12-09 20:22 ` David S. Miller
2002-12-09 17:49 ` Jim Houston
2002-12-09 17:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-12-09 23:30 ` Paul Mackerras
2002-12-10 23:07 ` george anzinger
2002-12-11 7:10 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-12-11 8:11 ` george anzinger
2002-12-11 8:26 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-12-10 11:08 ` Jamie Lokier
2002-12-05 2:27 ` Jim Houston
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-12-09 16:58 Mikael Starvik
2002-12-09 17:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-12-09 18:46 ` David Mosberger
2002-12-10 0:13 ` Paul Mackerras
2002-12-10 23:11 ` george anzinger
2002-12-09 17:16 Martin Schwidefsky
2002-12-09 17:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-12-09 20:18 ` David S. Miller
2002-12-09 17:56 Martin Schwidefsky
2002-12-09 18:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-12-10 14:40 ` Keith Owens
2002-12-09 18:41 Martin Schwidefsky
2002-12-09 18:52 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-12-10 8:20 ` george anzinger
2002-12-10 8:42 Martin Schwidefsky
2002-12-10 17:17 Martin Schwidefsky
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20021205031037.GA31292@averell \
--to=ak@muc.de \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=davidm@hpl.hp.com \
--cc=george@mvista.com \
--cc=jim.houston@ccur.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ralf@gnu.org \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
--cc=willy@debian.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.