From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cantor.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:37559 "EHLO mx1.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751515AbWIDUaa (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Sep 2006 16:30:30 -0400 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert [i386/x86_64]: Remove __KERNEL__ ifdef around _syscall*() Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2006 22:30:13 +0200 References: <200608302359.k7UNxIZW027536@hera.kernel.org> <1157398050.2473.137.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <1157398050.2473.137.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200609042230.13455.ak@suse.de> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org To: David Woodhouse Cc: torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > 1. C libraries have their own syscall(); there's no _need_ for these > macros to be exported by the kernel. I like having them there. I find it it useful for my test programs. It's also useful for numactl for once. > 3. We should be consistent about what we provide in kernel headers. > Since we don't provide these macros on other architectures, we should > not do so on i386 and x86_64 -- especially as the reason for doing so > seems to be just that the arch maintainer doesn't want to use the > proper glibc function in his test hacks. We've always provided them and continuing to do so is consistent. -Andi