From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: schwab@suse.de (Andreas Schwab) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 09:58:43 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v6 13/17] arm64:ilp32: add sys_ilp32.c and a separate table (in entry.S) to use it In-Reply-To: <10433819.KzDuoxzSn7@wuerfel> (Arnd Bergmann's message of "Thu, 12 Nov 2015 00:23:43 +0100") References: <1446507046-24604-1-git-send-email-ynorov@caviumnetworks.com> <20577001.4Nl3YnQ8k2@wuerfel> <87k2pojfsy.fsf@igel.home> <10433819.KzDuoxzSn7@wuerfel> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Arnd Bergmann writes: > I think either way is fine for the two examples. I think it's clear > that we want __NR_llseek as 62 and __NR_mmap2 as 222. Whether those > use the compat_sys_llseek/compat_sys_mmap2_wrapper or > sys_lseek/sys_mmap entry points is not overly important, we can use > whatever is more convenient to glibc: if we can kill off an > architecture specific wrapper function in glibc by adding one line > to the kernel, that seems worthwhile. Currently most off_t-like syscalls need a new glibc wrapper since the existing ones are either for 32bit off_t+off64_t (with split off64_t syscall arguments) or pure 64bit off_t architectures. Since ilp32 now (mostly) has 32bit off_t, but 64bit off_t-like syscalls neither of them fit. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, schwab at suse.de GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE 1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7 "And now for something completely different."