Re: [PATCH 00/15] arch: synchronize syscall tables in preparation for y2038

Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-01-11T08:07:43Z

Hi Arnd,

On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 11:43 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 7:11 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 6:06 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 5:59 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 5:26 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> > > > > The system call tables have diverged a bit over the years, and a number
> > > > > of the recent additions never made it into all architectures, for one
> > > > > reason or another.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is an attempt to clean it up as far as we can without breaking
> > > > > compatibility, doing a number of steps:
> > > >
> > > > Thanks a lot!
> > > >
> > > > > - Add system calls that have not yet been integrated into all
> > > > > architectures but that we definitely want there.
> > > >
> > > > It looks like you missed wiring up io_pgetevents() on m68k.
> > > > Is that intentional?
> > >
> > > Yes, I thought I had described that somewhere but maybe I
> > > forgot: semtimedop() and io_pgetevents() get replaced with
> > > time64 versions in the follow-up, so I only added them in
> > > 64-bit architectures. If you think we should have both
> > > io_pgetevents() and io_pgetevents_time32() on all 32-bit
> > > architectures, I can add that as well.
> >
> > Thanks, sounds fine to me.
>
> Just to be sure, you mean it's fine to not add it, not that we should
> add it?

I'm fine with not having the legacy 32-bit ones.

Sorry for being unclear.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds