From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from fmr03.intel.com ([143.183.121.5]:61652 "EHLO hermes.sc.intel.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261746AbUCBTqo (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Mar 2004 14:46:44 -0500 Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 11:43:02 -0800 From: Arun Sharma Subject: Re: SHMLBA and compat tasks Message-ID: <20040302194302.GA17408@intel.com> References: <20040228014128.GA6897@intel.com> <20040228155529.64bc0741.davem@redhat.com> <20040229021105.GA6964@intel.com> <20040229215752.3a6f0ce7.davem@redhat.com> <20040301193308.GA13305@intel.com> <16451.37325.109790.457348@napali.hpl.hp.com> <20040301201613.GA13349@intel.com> <20040301205510.GF25779@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040301205510.GF25779@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: davidm@hpl.hp.com, "David S. Miller" , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Mar 01, 2004 at 08:55:10PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Mon, Mar 01, 2004 at 12:16:13PM -0800, Arun Sharma wrote: > > Sounds like we have sufficient grounds for using different alignment > > rules for different architectures ? > > #ifndef COMPAT_SHMLBA > #define COMPAT_SHMLBA SHMLBA > #endif > > should be enough, no? I'm concerned that we'll have to duplicate/inline much of sys_shmat() in ipc/compat.c and it might become a maintenance problem. Perhaps there is a way to do it in a better way, but I don't see it. An ifdef in sys_shmat() that distinugishes between architectures that enforce SHMLBA in all cases and the ones which don't would be ideal for my purposes. -Arun