From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailserv2.iuinc.com (qmailr@mailserv2.iuinc.com [206.245.164.55]) by sod.res.cmu.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id PAA27061 for ; Thu, 25 Mar 1999 15:13:11 -0500 Received: from tintin.mcom.com (tintin.mcom.com [205.217.233.42]) by netscape.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id MAA24376 for ; Thu, 25 Mar 1999 12:12:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from netscape.com ([205.217.243.139]) by tintin.mcom.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.03) with ESMTP id F962T600.JEP for ; Thu, 25 Mar 1999 12:12:42 -0800 Sender: shaver@netscape.com (Mike Shaver) Message-ID: <36FA98B2.3B82B92A@netscape.com> Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 15:12:34 -0500 From: Mike Shaver MIME-Version: 1.0 To: hppa-linux@thepuffingroup.com Subject: Re: [hppa-linux] syscall work References: <199903251919.LAA01701@cllmail.cup.hp.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-ID: Cary Coutant wrote: > I'd suggest *not* using the same gateway page address as HP-UX. If you > do, you won't be able to develop a later kernel extension to support > HP-UX binaries, unless you allocate syscall numbers carefully. Well, my plan was to do what the MIPS guys have done (and others, like maybe SPARC?): syscall numbers 0 to 200-something are __NR_HP_syscall, and then the Linux ones start at 1000. HP-UX binary emulation is something that I really really want early on, because it will give us a functioning userland while we're trying to get compiler and linker and glibc ports complete and working. But maybe you're right -- maybe we use one gateway page address for HP-UX compat, and another for native-Linux syscalls. We have a lot more flexibility in our system call mechanism than the other platforms did, I think, so perhaps there's a better way. It'd be nice to have hpux.o as a module for binary compatibility, when we get there, but that's probably not so hard. Ponder... The checked-in unistd.h has appropriate syscall numbering to support the current plan, if you'd like to peek. Mike -- 78101.27 70129.77