From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 10:42:55 +0200 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: RFC: is_compat_task Message-ID: <20050630084255.GC13890@bragg.suse.de> References: <20050628181453.387e0fac.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20050628091704.GP4171@wotan.suse.de> <20050628111828.GL5200@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> <20050628.134736.45885284.davem@davemloft.net> <20050629164127.58e97376.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20050629121228.GH21575@bragg.suse.de> <20050630175741.0fba8049.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050630175741.0fba8049.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Andi Kleen , davem@davemloft.net, matthew@wil.cx, hch@lst.de, akpm@osdl.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 05:57:41PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 14:12:28 +0200 Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > I think for the particular input case it would be still better > > to just define ->compat_write at the VFS level. > > > > This would require a new compat_sys_write() wrapper, but that would > > be straight forward. > > You mean something like this? Yes, but ... > > -ssize_t vfs_write(struct file *file, const char __user *buf, size_t count, loff_t *pos) > +static ssize_t do_vfs_write(struct file *file, const char __user *buf, > + size_t count, loff_t *pos, int compat) Instead of the flag I would move the code figuring out the call vector into the caller. -Andi