From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:04:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:04:48 -0400 Received: from gateway-1237.mvista.com ([12.44.186.158]:32507 "EHLO hermes.mvista.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:04:35 -0400 Message-ID: <3B8561B9.AC440835@mvista.com> Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:04:09 -0700 From: george anzinger Organization: Monta Vista Software X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20b i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Russell King CC: Victor Yodaiken , "christophe =?iso-8859-1?Q?barb=E9?=" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: How should nano_sleep be fixed (was: ptrace(), fork(), sleep(), exit(), SIGCHLD) In-Reply-To: <20010817125727.A16475@hq2> <3B7D76EF.DA34EB23@mvista.com> <20010822194035.K18391@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Russell King wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 17, 2001 at 12:56:31PM -0700, george anzinger wrote: > > Uh..? I though that was what I was allowing. It seems to me to be a > > lot of extra work to put the same code in 15 different archs. > > Especially if one does not really know each of them, nor can any one > > group (or individual) be expected to be able to test (or even have the > > hardware to test) each of them. > > Umm, my best advice is to look at sys_fork() and do_fork(), sys_execve() > and do_execve(). > Sorry, but none of those system calls requires the registers which is where the problem is. George