From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ulrich Drepper Subject: Re: [PATCH] reintroduce accept4 Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 21:22:59 -0700 Message-ID: <490693A3.9070805@redhat.com> References: <200810261641.m9QGfotr024285@hs20-bc2-1.build.redhat.com> <20081027204135.a139704e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20081027204135.a139704e.akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, torvalds-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org, linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Andrew Morton wrote: > I'll confess to not having a clue what's going on here. It has been discussed at length. accept created file descriptors and w= e need flags for tis. >> #elif __i386__ >> #define SYS_ACCEPT4 18 >> #define USE_SOCKETCALL 1 >> #define SOCK_CLOEXEC O_CLOEXEC >> #else >=20 > Well. This doesn't actually agree with the kernel patch. What doesn't agree? > I'd suggest that i386 is sufficiently common to warrant its inclusion > in the initial patch. The x86 code is included. x86 uses socketcall instead of a syscall. I changed all paccept occurrences in the tree, not just x86-64. - -- =E2=9E=A7 Ulrich Drepper =E2=9E=A7 Red Hat, Inc. =E2=9E=A7 444 Castro S= t =E2=9E=A7 Mountain View, CA =E2=9D=96 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkkGk6MACgkQ2ijCOnn/RHSwSgCfeb/PGDCm2qy0ZESqWb8wgyhX cHoAoIIXvhBjdxcj2gy09eQBzNKOTwCU =3DQSFh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html