Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.21

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

On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 01:45:16PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Feb 2007 17:35:35 +0000
> David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 2007-02-08 at 15:07 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > lutimesat-simplify-utime2.patch
> > > lutimesat-extend-do_utimes-with-flags.patch
> > > lutimesat-actual-syscall-and-wire-up-on-i386.patch
> > > 
> > >  Do we want this?  Ulrich says so.  Will merge, I guess.
> > 
> > I would strongly recommend that in the general case, you don't merge new
> > system calls unless the corresponding compat_ system call is
> > implemented.
> 
> Good point.
> 
> > This makes sure that people adding system calls will design the API for
> > the new system call appropriately, rather than trying to implement
> > compat support as an afterthought and only then realising that they wish
> > the original had been done differently. We've seen examples of this
> > where it would have been _trivial_ to adjust the API slightly to make
> > compat syscalls a non-issue, but the developer just didn't _think_ about
> > it until the syscall was set in stone.
> > 
> > This new system call seems to need compat_ support but lacks it, so I
> > would suggest you shouldn't merge it just yet.
> 
> OK, thanks.

urgh, new system calls... wonder if they fit in the ARM ABI...  Looks
fine.

Are there any other new syscalls sitting around in -mm ?

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