Re: [-next Nov 17] s390 build break(arch/s390/kernel/compat_wrapper.S)

[Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk>]

On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 08:04:18AM +0100, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 10:23:56AM -0500, Eric Paris wrote:
> With
> 
> long sys_fanotify_mark(int fanotify_fd, unsigned int flags,
>      	 	       int fd, const char  __user *pathname,
>                        u64 mask);
> 
> we have a 64 bit type as 5th argument. That doesn't work for syscalls
> on 32 bit s390.

Note that the above works on ARM, since we end up with the following
register allocation:

r0: fanotify_fd
r1: flags
r2: fd
r3: pathname
r4,r5: mask

since 'mask' is an even,odd pair, and the arguments all fit within r0 - r5
inclusive.

> Please note that other architectures (I think at least arm and powerpc) put
> 64 bit values into even/odd register pairs and add padding if the first free
> available register is an odd one. So any of the following interfaces should
> work for all architectures:

Indeed.

Since we're going around the loop of re-organizing the argument order of
syscalls, the question which needs asking is: what's happening with HPA's
idea of having a set of per-arch rules and generating the interfaces
according to those rules?

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of: