From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ns1.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:7324 "EHLO mx1.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751022AbWH1Om4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Aug 2006 10:42:56 -0400 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] remove all remaining _syscallX macros Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 16:42:21 +0200 References: <200608281003.02757.ak@suse.de> <1156759232.5340.36.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <200608281606.00602.arnd@arndb.de> In-Reply-To: <200608281606.00602.arnd@arndb.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200608281642.21737.ak@suse.de> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: David Woodhouse , David Miller , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, jdike@addtoit.com, B.Steinbrink@gmx.de, arjan@infradead.org, chase.venters@clientec.com, akpm@osdl.org, rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Monday 28 August 2006 16:05, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > The patch below should address both these issues, as long as the libc > has a working implementation of syscall(2). I would prefer the _syscall() macros to stay independent of the actual glibc version. Or what do you do otherwise on a system with old glibc? Upgrading glibc is normally a major PITA. -Andi