From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266361AbUGOVN0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Jul 2004 17:13:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266362AbUGOVN0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Jul 2004 17:13:26 -0400 Received: from mail3.speakeasy.net ([216.254.0.203]:55005 "EHLO mail3.speakeasy.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266361AbUGOVNX (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Jul 2004 17:13:23 -0400 Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:13:15 -0700 Message-Id: <200407152113.i6FLDFfB013246@magilla.sf.frob.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Roland McGrath To: Andi Kleen X-Fcc: ~/Mail/linus Cc: akpm@osdl.org, torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jparadis@redhat.com, cagney@redhat.com, discuss@x86-64.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86-64 singlestep through sigreturn system call In-Reply-To: Andi Kleen's message of Thursday, 15 July 2004 07:46:18 +0200 <20040715074618.4c33bd31.ak@suse.de> X-Zippy-Says: Hello? Enema Bondage? I'm calling because I want to be happy, I guess.. Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Anyways, I don't have any plans to change the 64bit behaviour. gdb will > have to live with a few minor inconsistencies as price for faster system > calls. My patch doesn't slow anything down beyond one comparison and branch not taken in the rt_sigreturn system call. Does that negligible meaning of "faster" really warrant the inconsistent user behavior? Thanks, Roland