Re: [PATCH 6/7] remove all remaining _syscallX macros

H. Peter Anvin
2006-08-30T05:45:52Z

Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Monday 28 August 2006 16:05, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
>> The patch below should address both these issues, as long as the libc
>> has a working implementation of syscall(2).
>
> I would prefer the _syscall() macros to stay independent of the
> actual glibc version. Or what do you do otherwise on a system
> with old glibc? Upgrading glibc is normally a major PITA.
>

Why don't you just have a private version of the macros?

syscall(2) is, again, a horrible botch -- on architectures which
requires alignment for register pairs, the extra register buggers up the
alignment. One *can* work around it by making the syscall number 64
bits, but I think it's safe to say that no libc does that currently.

-hpa