From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rob Landley Subject: Re: Generic syscall ABI support Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 23:41:37 -0500 Message-ID: <1364532097.18069.7@driftwood> References: <201303281142.47631.arnd@arndb.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; DelSp=Yes; Format=Flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Return-path: In-Reply-To: <201303281142.47631.arnd@arndb.de> (from arnd@arndb.de on Thu Mar 28 06:42:47 2013) Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Ley Foon Tan , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On 03/28/2013 06:42:47 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thursday 28 March 2013, Ley Foon Tan wrote: > > On Thu, 2013-03-28 at 10:40 +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Thursday 28 March 2013, Ley Foon Tan wrote: > > > > We will working on generic ABI for kernel and Glibc. This might > take > > > > some times. > > > > > > Ok. Don't let that hold you up from submitting the kernel patches > > > for review though. > > > > Do you mean we can submit the patches for review before we got the > > generic ABI support? > > I mean you can send the other patches for review already. Changing > your implementtion to use the generic ABI will basically just mean > not sending the patches tht implement your own ABI, so that's not > hard. Of course until you also have a new glibc port, you won't be > able to test that it actually works, but that is not essential for > the reviewing stage. You don't need a new glibc port, you need a new klibc or musl port. http://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2012/07/08/1 Way less work than getting glibc working for your basic smoketest... Rob From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ia0-f181.google.com ([209.85.210.181]:51503 "EHLO mail-ia0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753279Ab3C2Ell convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Mar 2013 00:41:41 -0400 Received: by mail-ia0-f181.google.com with SMTP id o25so179463iad.12 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 2013 21:41:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 23:41:37 -0500 From: Rob Landley Subject: Re: Generic syscall ABI support In-Reply-To: <201303281142.47631.arnd@arndb.de> (from arnd@arndb.de on Thu Mar 28 06:42:47 2013) Message-ID: <1364532097.18069.7@driftwood> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; DelSp=Yes; Format=Flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Ley Foon Tan , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20130329044137._Fqj3XZCfwYGelRrZ8SaB992KszlBhcUOe4pRcFIZ_g@z> On 03/28/2013 06:42:47 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thursday 28 March 2013, Ley Foon Tan wrote: > > On Thu, 2013-03-28 at 10:40 +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Thursday 28 March 2013, Ley Foon Tan wrote: > > > > We will working on generic ABI for kernel and Glibc. This might > take > > > > some times. > > > > > > Ok. Don't let that hold you up from submitting the kernel patches > > > for review though. > > > > Do you mean we can submit the patches for review before we got the > > generic ABI support? > > I mean you can send the other patches for review already. Changing > your implementtion to use the generic ABI will basically just mean > not sending the patches tht implement your own ABI, so that's not > hard. Of course until you also have a new glibc port, you won't be > able to test that it actually works, but that is not essential for > the reviewing stage. You don't need a new glibc port, you need a new klibc or musl port. http://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2012/07/08/1 Way less work than getting glibc working for your basic smoketest... Rob