Re: [PATCH v2 02/16] sparc/compat: Provide an accurate in_compat_syscall implementation

Andy Lutomirski
2016-01-26T17:48:29Z

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:51:00PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
>> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 07:29:51 +0100
>>
>> > Could you please add a comment about where 0x110 comes from.
>> > I at least failed to track this down.
>>
>> Frankly I'm fine with this. Someone who understands sparc64 can look
>> at the trap table around entry 0x110 and see:
>>
>> tl0_resv10e: BTRAP(0x10e) BTRAP(0x10f)
>> tl0_linux32: LINUX_32BIT_SYSCALL_TRAP
>> tl0_oldlinux64: LINUX_64BIT_SYSCALL_TRAP
>
> If one realise to look in the trap table in the first place - yes.
>
> Adding a short:
>
> /* Check if this is LINUX_32BIT_SYSCALL_TRAP */
> Would make wonders to readability.

I'll add a comment in v2.

--Andy
--
Andy Lutomirski
AMA Capital Management, LLC