From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: What's in asm-generic.git Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 22:25:05 +0100 Message-ID: <200912102225.05280.arnd@arndb.de> References: <200912102210.12124.arnd@arndb.de> <8bd0f97a0912101317v8143e67w9e2f1224111ac0d7@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.10]:56141 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761250AbZLJVZG (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Dec 2009 16:25:06 -0500 In-Reply-To: <8bd0f97a0912101317v8143e67w9e2f1224111ac0d7@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Mike Frysinger Cc: liqin.chen@sunplusct.com, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 10 December 2009, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > I have found now that sys_accept4 was missing. sys_set_thread_area however > > is only defined on x86 and mips. Since you don't currently implement this > > on score, maybe it would be more appropriate to handle it like the other > > architectures do, rather than adding it to asm-generic/unistd.h? > > isnt the point of asm-generic/unistd.h to collect all common syscalls > ? if there's syscalls that ideally should be handled by everyone but > currently doesnt, then it's easy to define it in the header but have > the actual entry.S leave it as a hole ... Well, sys_thread_area is not a common syscall but rather an exception. I haven't looked at how glibc does implents TLS on different architectures, but I think this is commonly done purely in user space without the need for a syscall. Arnd